Loading...
06/23/2026ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING OF JUNE 23, 2026 The regular meeting of June 23, 2026 was called to order at 3:05 p.m. in the Council Chamber of Anaheim City Hall, located at 200 South Anaheim Boulevard. The meeting notice, agenda, and related material were duly posted on June 18, 2026. MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Ashleigh E. Aitken and Council Members Carlos A. Leon, Ryan Balius, Natalie Rubalcava, Norma Campos Kurtz, Kristen M. Maahs, and Natalie Meeks STAFF PRESENT: Interim City Manager Greg Garcia, City Attorney Robert Fabela, and City Clerk Theresa Bass PUBLIC COMMENTS ON WORKSHOP: Jorge Gavino, Chair of the Budget, Investment and Technology Commission, thanked the City Council and staff for the opportunity to serve and noted that the City held approximately 15 public meetings related to the budget, emphasizing the importance of public participation and transparency in the budgeting process. He congratulated City staff and the Finance Department for receiving a Distinguished Budget Presentation Award from the Government Finance Officers Association. He shared that the Commission recommended continued efforts to attract and retain both large and small conventions at the Anaheim Convention Center, particularly longstanding partnerships. He recognized the City's coordinated efforts to address homelessness, citing a 10% decrease in unsheltered individuals between 2024 and 2026. He reported that the Commission recommended increasing the City's reserve target from 7% to 20-25%, emphasizing that stronger reserves would help protect public services during future economic or other emergencies. He added that the Commission expressed strong support for developing a wildland fire suppression crew within the Fire and Rescue Department and continuing investments in fire protection capacity as wildfire risks increase. He concluded by reiterating the Commission's commitment to public trust, transparency, and responsible budgeting. Marc Herbert questioned whether the City's budget workshop process provides an adequate level of public engagement. He stated that workshops should facilitate transparent two-way communication, collaborative problem -solving, brainstorming, and meaningful community feedback rather than function primarily as presentations or seminars. He recommended balancing presentations with interactive discussions and providing follow-up on outcomes, responsibilities, and unresolved issues. He expressed concern that allowing public comments before staff presentations may limit meaningful discussion and that holding the workshop on the same day as the budget vote does not provide a sufficient open opportunity for public participation. City Clerk Theresa Bass reported that no electronic public comments were submitted related to the Workshop. D106 WORKSHOP: Proposed Fiscal Year 2026/27 Budget (Public Utilities; Public Works; Planning & Building; Economic Development; Housing & Community Development; and Convention, Sports & Entertainment) Interim City Manager Greg Garcia introduced the Budget Workshop featuring presentations from Public Utilities, Public Works, Planning and Building, Economic Development, Housing and Community Development, and Convention, Sports, and Entertainment. He noted that Council would consider the adoption of the proposed budget, appropriation limits, and user fee changes during the City Council Minutes of June 23, 2026 Page 2 of 49 public hearing. He stated that the proposed FY 2026/27 budget reflects progress toward structural balance after the City navigated structural deficits since 2020, primarily driven by rising operational costs and temporarily addressed through one-time revenues while maintaining existing service levels and strategically adding services. He noted that the proposed budget includes a manageable funding gap, continued revenue growth, and a path toward structural balance as the LPMR (Lease Payment Measurement Revenues) bonds approach retirement. He reported that the budget totals approximately $2.6 billion and includes more than $324 million in capital improvement investments, focused on neighborhood improvements, utility and infrastructure reliability, and new amenities for parks and community spaces. Public Utilities Department Public Utilities General Manager Dukku Lee stated that Anaheim Public Utilities' (APU) core services include providing electricity and water to Anaheim homes, schools, and businesses. He noted that as a community -owned utility, our employees help customers with ways to save on their utility bills, security lighting, and efficiency programs. He reported that the Department employee count includes 361 full-time and 39 part-time FTEs. He added that for FY 2026/27, the Department is requesting three new positions. He explained that the first two positions are electric crew members, a supervisor and a line mechanic. He noted that the additions would allow the Department to perform more capital projects in-house and enhance the City's ability to respond to emergencies. He added that the third position was a Substation Test Technician Supervisor who would support grid modernization of high voltage equipment. General Manager Lee reported that the Department's proposed budget of $783 million represents 30% of the Citywide budget. He added that the General Fund makes up less than 1 % of the City's budget and covers energy costs for street lights and the City's 311 information line. He provided an overview of the Department's five (5) divisions, along with power and water supply. He stated that the operating budget was increasing modestly from the current year by 2% while the Department's total budget was increasing by approximately 3%, reflecting additional investments in capital infrastructure. He added that the majority of the Department's operating budget was due to wholesale costs in the Other Operating category, reflecting power and water supplies needed to serve Anaheim customers. He reported that the Department finances capital investments, spreading debt service costs over the life of those assets. He added that given the long-term life of the City's infrastructure, use of financing tools has helped keep the customer rates stable and affordable. He noted that labor makes up 12% of the operating budget, and the remaining 1 % covers capital outlay for technology systems, vehicles, and facility improvements. General Manager Lee stated that the budget reflects six (6) strategic priorities, including: reliable service, affordability and financial health, safety, community engagement, risk mitigation, and sustainability. He noted that the Department focuses on safe and reliable service to customers, while controlling our costs and managing the many risks facing the utility industry. He added that the Department was planning for the future: increasing renewable energy, prioritizing sustainable groundwater supplies, and helping customers use fewer resources that also maintain affordable bills. General Manager Lee reported that the Administration & Risk Services Division includes customer service, which handles over 20,000 phone calls, emails, chats, Anaheim Anytime requests, and in - person visits each month. He shared that staff leverages technology, which helps keep the average call wait times to 1.4 minutes, and noted that employees helped over 25,000 customers who were eligible for bill assistance, payment plans, or bill extensions depending on their unique circumstances. He added that the Division handles risk management, regulatory compliance, and environmental and safety oversight — conducting over 360 facility inspections and trainings over the past year. City Council Minutes of June 23, 2026 Page 3 of 49 General Manager Lee reported that the Water Division was responsible for managing wholesale supplies from Orange County Water District and Metropolitan Water District. He stated that currently, Colorado River imports are strained by years of low precipitation and snowpack, so regional storage investments and local conservation rebates are helping the City prepare for future droughts. He noted that APU operates a state -certified water laboratory and conducts 44,000 tests annually. He added that APU has secured $10 million in State grant funding to offset groundwater treatment costs, with another $8 million pending. He stated that over half of the City's water capital program is dedicated to replacing aging pipes and installing new ones for reimbursable development projects. He added that the water system reliability continues to perform well with lower main breaks compared to the national average. General Manager Lee stated that the Electric Division operates and maintains the local grid. He noted that APU was recognized again as a Reliable Public Power Provider, an achievement roughly 250 of the 2,000+ publicly -owned utilities nationwide receive. He highlighted the City's outage duration, which was better than the national average for public agencies as well as Southern California Edison who serves north and central Orange County. He added that outages can occur at any time due to weather, metallic balloons, vehicle accidents, equipment issues, and vandalism. He noted that safely responding to outages to restore customers is the City's highest priority. He stated that capital investments are a high priority to continually upgrade or replace aging equipment, underground power lines, and increase automation, which are essential to reducing customer disruptions. General Manager Lee reported that the Finance and Energy Resources Division manages Anaheim's power supply portfolio in addition to the department's financial well-being. He added that the Department continues to keep electric and water rates affordable for residents through financial strategies and cost controls even with supply chain challenges and increases to wholesale costs. He stated that as for the City's power supplies, the Department is working to acquire the resources needed to achieve 60% renewables by 2030 and is tracking technology and industry advances to be carbon -free by 2045. General Manager Lee stated that the General Services Division manages the customer efficiency programs for residents and businesses. He noted that through rebates, business and home surveys, high efficiency lights, and other conservation measures, the Anaheim community saved 7 million kilowatt hours and 7.5 million gallons of water last year. He added that the student programs introduce conservation concepts and environmental stewardship. He stated that over the past decade, APU expanded such efforts to incorporate career exploration with mentorships, symposiums, tours, and scholarships. He noted that over the past year, APU has partnered with Public Works to launch a skilled trades career event with students from Savanna, Loara, and Maxwell high schools. General Manager Lee provided an overview of current year highlights. He reported that APU maintains over 24,000 street lights, prioritizing new installations based on input from other departments, residents, and businesses. He added that APU continues to address wire theft by hardening infrastructure and replacing copper wire with aluminum, while partnering with Anaheim Police, which has led to several arrests. He stated that the Dusk to Dawn program utilizes high - efficiency lights to improve safety at homes, multi -family complexes, and businesses, making a noticeable difference. He added that over the past October, students from Olive, Jefferson, and Roosevelt elementary schools helped APU dedicate the Sustainability Education Center. He noted that APU has welcomed 700 attendees through programs ranging from landscape workshops to student engagement and business customer meetings. He shared that at OCVIBE, new electric infrastructure would be completed over the summer to support the development's full build -out as well as the 2028 Olympics. He reported that in April 2026, City Council awarded a construction project to install electrical infrastructure at Gypsum Canyon Memorial Park, which would include the Veterans City Council Minutes of June 23, 2026 Page 4 of 49 Cemetery. He added that APU is working on a new water main extension to this site that will be brought to Council for consideration later in the year. General Manager Lee stated that APU would continue modernizing the local grid to support Statewide electrification goals, and apply best industry practices such as thermal scanning of equipment to identify issues early on. He noted that the wildfire mitigation plan covers both electric and water systems. He reported that Undergrounding efforts, partially funded by a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) grant, have been completed in four (4) of the seven (7) segments, and the remaining sections are under construction. He stated that on the water side, APU's updated plan identifies facility upgrades and pipeline interconnection projects to improve resilience in high fire risk areas. He added that 14 wildfire cameras are currently deployed to enable Anaheim Fire & Rescue and APU operations staff to improve situational awareness. He shared that in the upcoming year, four (4) additional cameras would be added to the regional camera network. He reported that additional highlights include significant investments in water and electric infrastructure. He noted that a $7.5 million State grant would accelerate procurement and implementation of a new type of high voltage switch to strengthen grid reliability. He added that the continuation of Citywide undergrounding would improve service reliability and harden APU's system against weather events. He concluded that altogether the investments reflect the City's commitment to keeping APU's service safe, reliable, and affordable for the customers the City serves. Public Works Department Director of Public Works Rudy Emami stated that Public Works is proud to serve the community every day by delivering and sustaining the infrastructure that keeps Anaheim moving. He shared that Public Works touches nearly every aspect of daily life in the City, from streets and sidewalks to sewer and storm drain systems, traffic operations, fleet services, sanitation, and facility maintenance. He explained that Public Works' mission is simple: plan, build, and preserve. He added that the mission guides everything the Department does. Director Emami reported that the Department's proposed budget includes 261 full-time staff and 52 part-time staff. He stated that the proposed Public Works budget is approximately $349 million. He highlighted that the majority of the Department's budget is supported by restricted and enterprise funding sources, including sanitation, gas tax, Measure M, and internal service funds. He added that only 12% of the Department's total budget is supported by the General Fund. He stated that the structure allows the Department to continue delivering large-scale infrastructure and operational services while maximizing outside and restricted funding sources whenever possible. He provided an overview of the proposed budget by division, noting the largest increases within Capital Improvements, largely tied to the timing and delivery of several multi -year infrastructure projects. He noted that the budget reflects continued investment in maintaining infrastructure, supporting operations, and preparing for future growth throughout Anaheim. He added that the largest portion of the operating budget falls under Other Operating Costs. He explained that the category includes major contractual services such as solid waste operations and internal service charges that support Citywide operations. He reported that labor represents approximately 25% of the operating budget, which reflects the highly operational nature of the Department's work. Director Emami stated that Administration and Financial Services provides the operational backbone for the Department, including budgeting, accounting, administrative support, engineering records, and commuter services. He noted that the overall increase in the division is primarily related to the redistribution of insurance costs and standard contractual salary and benefit adjustments. He added that the increases are a common theme amongst the other divisions. City Council Minutes of June 23, 2026 Page 5 of 49 Director Emami reported that Engineering Services includes development services, design, traffic engineering, and transportation planning. He noted that the division continues to play a major role in supporting both private development and public infrastructure improvements throughout Anaheim. He stated that labor increases were due to contractually obligated increases in salary and burden as well as proposed staffing additions, which are mainly tied to Disneyland Forward activity and are expected to be revenue offset. He added that the team continues to deliver significant infrastructure work Citywide, including arterial paving, sewer rehabilitation, traffic signal coordination, and permit processing. Director Emami provided an overview of the Operations Divisions, noting that Operations is the frontline of the Department. He explained that the team maintains streets, sidewalks, traffic systems, landscaping, sanitation operations, and the Anaheim Resort Maintenance District. He reported that the increase in the Division was largely tied to rising solid waste disposal and service costs, along with contractual labor adjustments and the addition of one (1) personnel to support oversight of Sewer Operations, which is funded by the Department's Enterprise Fund. He recognized the tremendous amount of work the team handles every day responding to maintenance requests, keeping neighborhoods clean, and addressing quality of life concerns throughout the City. Director Emami reported that Fleet and Facility Services maintains the City's vehicles, equipment, buildings, and facilities. He noted that this year, Anaheim was recognized as one of the Top 100 Fleets in the nation, which is a reflection of the professionalism and efficiency of the team. He stated that increases in labor are due to contractually obligated salary and benefit adjustments. He added that other operating increases are related to building maintenance. He explained a decrease in capital outlay, related to the timing of the Citywide vehicle replacement schedule. Director Emami stated that Construction Services provides contract management, surveying, and inspection for both public and private improvements throughout the City. He explained that an increase in the Division was primarily tied to additional inspection support associated with Disneyland Forward. He shared that the team plays a critical role in ensuring projects are delivered safely, efficiently, and in compliance with City standards. He reported that an area the Department continues to focus heavily on is cleanliness and quality of life. He noted that through the Anaheim Litter Removal Taskforce and the HALO program, Public Works has removed more than 266 tons of debris Citywide this year. He noted that the efforts require strong coordination across departments and have made a meaningful difference in some of our most impacted corridors and public spaces. He reported that Public Works continues to invest heavily in neighborhood infrastructure improvements across the City. He stated that this year, the concrete replacement projects improved more than 800 locations Citywide, including sidewalks, curbs, gutters, and accessibility upgrades. He added that the Department continues the annual palm tree maintenance program, which helps preserve the health and appearance of one of Anaheim's most recognizable features. Director Emami reported that facility maintenance happens behind the scenes, but is critical to protecting City assets and ensuring the City's facilities remain safe and operational. He shared that this year, the City completed a full roof replacement at Canyon Hills Library, extending the life of that facility for decades to come. He noted that next year, Public Works would continue the efforts with a full roof replacement at Fire Station 9. Director Emami stated that improving neighborhoods remains one of the top priorities for the year. He noted that Public Works successfully completed Woodsboro Phase II, including using entirely in- house crews, which provides cost savings, flexibility, and strong quality control. He added that Public Works completed the Norma -Juno neighborhood project. He reported that next year, Public Works anticipates completing the Monterey Baker neighborhood improvements. He shared that the projects City Council Minutes of June 23, 2026 Page 6 of 49 directly improve the daily quality of life for residents and are a great example of the value the crews provide to the community. Director Emami reported that Public Works continues to advance major infrastructure projects throughout the City. He stated that the projects include the La Palma Storm Drain Improvement Project, which would help address long-standing flooding and pedestrian safety concerns near schools and key travel corridors. He added that Public Works also anticipates beginning construction on the Orangewood Bridge Widening project, an important regional mobility improvement that supports the Platinum Triangle and broader transportation network. Director Emami shared that Public Works is more than infrastructure; the Department is about people, relationships, and community trust. He noted that Public Works continues to expand outreach and engagement efforts throughout Anaheim, because the Department believes that strong neighborhoods are built not only through projects and services, but through connection with the community the Department serves. He thanked the entire Public Works Department for their dedication and professionalism. He noted that the work they do every day has a direct impact on the quality of life in Anaheim and expressed pride in what the Department would continue to accomplish. Planning and Building Department Director of Planning and Building Heather Allen reported that the Department has three core divisions: Building Services, Community Preservation and Licensing, and Planning Services in addition to Administration. She stated that together the Department is focused on enhancing the City of Anaheim by developing and implementing land use policies that reflect the goals of the community, ensuring safe and code -compliant development and properties, attracting and retaining businesses that contribute towards a healthy economy, and providing exceptional customer service. She shared that Building Services ensures safe, strong, durable, and functional buildings, working with design professionals and tradespeople to implement the California Building Code and facilitate development in the City. She noted that the Division strives to provide responsive professional services for the benefit of our residents and businesses through plan check, permit issuance, and inspection services on private property. She reported that Community Preservation and Licensing safeguards the public and helps maintain a high quality of life and property through the enforcement of the Municipal Code, issuance of business licenses, and collection of transient occupancy taxes. She stated that Planning Services maintains and implements the City's General Plan and Zoning Code, assisting residents and businesses in using and developing private property in the City; participates in regional planning activities; and administers the City's historic preservation programs. She noted that the services are provided by a dedicated team of 105 full-time positions in addition to 33 part-time employees comprising 24.75 FTEs. She added that to supplement city staff positions, the department also relies on specialized consultants as needed. Director Allen reported that the proposed Department budget is $41 million, which is 1.6% of the total City budget and 6.6% of the General Fund. She shared that the Department is predominantly supported by the General Fund and collects fees for services such as building permits and discretionary and regulatory permits. She added that the Community Preservation budget does include $1.2 million of federal CDBG funds for Code Enforcement activities in qualifying neighborhoods. She stated that the proposed Department budget maintains the status quo, reflecting only changes to existing salary, benefit, and intergovernmental charges and the previously approved increased cost of Animal Care Services. She noted that overall, labor is the primary expense for the Department at 60% of the budget, followed by other operating expenses accounting for 39%. Director Allen stated that the Administration Division's budget is $1.5 million dollars, 4% of the Department budget. She shared that the Division provides leadership on the implementation of the City Council Minutes of June 23, 2026 Page 7 of 49 goals and priorities of the City Council and City Manager, and includes budget oversight, administrative support, and internal services. Director Allen reported that the Building Services' budget is $11 million, 27% of the Department's budget. She shared that performance highlights this year include the issuance of 7,260 building permits, performing 5,900 building plan checks, and conducting 46,455 building inspections. Director Allen stated that the Community Preservation and Licensing Division's budget was $20 million, 49% of the Department budget. She explained that the budget reflects a reduction in Capital Outlay due to completion of the City's obligation for the construction of the County Animal Shelter. She shared that highlights include responding to 7,690 Code Enforcement cases and 11,462 Anaheim Anytime requests, removing over 1.9 million square feet of graffiti, issuing 54,274 parking citations, and processing over 26,000 business licenses. Director Allen reported that Planning Services' budget is approximately $8.3 million, 20% of the department's budget. She shared that performance highlights over the year include assisting 8,502 customers at our public counter, performing 722 administrative reviews, completing 3,921 plan checks, and presenting 31 projects to the planning commission in addition to holding one (1) public workshop. Director Allen shared a few Department highlights, noting that the Planning and Building Services Divisions continue to be actively involved in the implementation of the OCVIBE project, the mixed -use and entertainment project on 95 acres surrounding the Honda Center and ARTIC approved in 2022. She stated that Phase 1 includes roadway improvements, three parking structures, a concert hall, office space, and restaurant and entertainment uses. She noted that two parking structures have been completed and are currently operational, with the remaining components in various stages of construction, with openings completed by 2027. She reported that recently, Final Site Plans for portions of Phase 2 were approved, including a parking structure serving ARTIC, entertainment and hotel uses south of the Honda Center, which are referred to as South Plaza and the Arena Hotel, and two residential buildings. She added that grading for the ARTIC parking structure and South Plaza is underway while plans for the vertical construction of Phase 2 are under review by the Building Division. Director Allen reported that the Disneyland Forward Project was approved by City Council in 2024 and provides for the continued, long-term growth of the Disneyland Resort. She stated that at Disney's California Adventure, two new attractions are currently under construction in an expanded Avengers Campus, and plans for a new Coco-themed attraction in the Pixar Pier area are under review. She added that in Downtown Disney, site preparation is underway for Porto's Bakery to replace the former La Brea Bakery, along with two new restaurants proposed in the former Tortilla Jo's location. She noted that in December 2025, Disney submitted construction drawings for a new east parking structure and transportation hub located east of Harbor Boulevard and north of Disney Way. She stated that the project includes over 6,000 parking spaces, a new transportation hub accommodating shuttles, buses, and rideshare services, and a security screening area. She added that construction on the parking structure is anticipated to begin in late 2026. Director Allen highlighted two efforts in response to City Council priorities. She noted that implementing the recently approved Economic Development Strategic Plan, the Planning & Building Department will lead the effort to collaborate with colleagues in Public Works, Fire, Police, Economic Development, Housing, Finance and the City Manager's Office to evaluate the land use entitlement and development permitting process and create a plan for short-, medium- and long-term improvements that incorporates stakeholder and policy -level input, industry best practices, and the use of innovative technologies. She explained that the important effort builds on the work the dedicated staff is already doing to identify opportunities to improve service delivery and add value to City Council Minutes of June 23, 2026 Page 8 of 49 interactions with customers. She added that the Planning and Building Department would re -focus proactive enforcement to systematically address commercial corridors Citywide, first providing education on common regulatory issues along with business resources, followed by Code Enforcement action as appropriate. She stated that existing efforts focused on quality of life issues in partnership with the Anaheim Police Department will continue, as will specialized enforcement related to tobacco, kratom, and nitrous oxide, and billboards. DISCUSSION: In response to Mayor Aitken, General Manager Lee identified the evolving State requirements related to electrification and renewable energy as a key challenge over the next five or ten years, particularly balancing those goals with affordability and cost control. He emphasized the importance of maintaining local flexibility and control so public utilities are not subject to the same requirements as investor -owned utilities when circumstances differ. He also identified supply -chain pressures and wildfire risk as ongoing industry challenges. He noted that the Department's aggressive undergrounding program was cited as an example of how local initiatives and FEMA grant funding have helped reduce wildfire exposure and avoid substantially higher mitigation costs. Mayor Aitken inquired about how much power the City is generating from the City's sources versus buying from other places. General Manager Lee reported that Public Utilities works diligently to meet the 60% renewables goal by 2030. He noted challenges due to federal policy changes, market conditions, and difficulties developers face with entitlement processes. He explained that the longer -term goal of achieving carbon -free operations by 2045 presents greater uncertainty, as future technologies and energy resources are still developing. He noted that potential technologies could become viable in the coming years. He emphasized the importance of maintaining financial flexibility so the City can evaluate and invest in emerging technologies and resources needed to achieve its long-term net -zero goal. In response to Council Member Maahs, General Manager Lee explained that 311 provides a centralized, non -emergency point of contact for general City questions and service requests, with calls routed to staff trained to address various City matters. He noted that the service operates during regular call -center hours and is not available 24/7. He explained that for utility emergencies such as power outages or other issues occurring after normal call -center hours, Public Utilities' operations staff remain available 24/7. He reported that the phone number is 714-765-4311. Council Member Maahs inquired whether 311 would be the appropriate contact for a resident reporting a leaking fire hydrant, indicating that such a non -emergency utility concern could be directed through the City's 311 service. General Manager Lee explained that residents can call the number on their utility bill, 714-765-3300. He noted that the same staff would respond and route calls appropriately. Council Member Maahs highlighted the Sustainability Education Center. She noted that the Center has been responsive to the Council's priorities and supportive of the autistic community. Council Member Balius questioned the difference in Water and Electric utility labor cost increases, noting that water service labor increased 12.6% compared with 10.5% for Electric, despite the addition of three new employees in the Electric Division. He inquired why the percentage increases were not more closely aligned. General Manager Lee explained that labor costs are affected by the amount of staff labor transferred to capital projects in both the Water and Electric Divisions. He stated that the three new electric positions are intended to increase the amount of work performed in-house, which can reduce costs City Council Minutes of June 23, 2026 Page 9 of 49 and provide greater City oversight and ownership of capital projects. He provided an example of the Veterans Cemetery project, noting that the civil work would be completed by the contractor and Public Utilities staff would handle the installation of new electrical materials. He noted that the approach was intended to control costs, maximize internal resources, and improve cost-effectiveness for major development projects. In response to Council Member Kurtz, Director Emami explained that the Disneyland Forward project represents a significant workload for the City, including planning, plan checking, and inspections. He stated that to ensure the project does not affect service levels for other City projects, the City Council approved a staffing agreement with Disneyland under which the company will fully fund additional City staff dedicated specifically to Disneyland Forward work. He reported that the additional staffing would not be funded through the City's General Fund, while allowing the City to maintain existing service levels for other projects. Council Member Meeks clarified that the Disneyland Forward project has resulted in additional staffing in both the Planning and Public Works departments. He stated that Planning staff was added earlier because planning and entitlement work precedes construction -related Public Works activities. He noted that the additional positions are dedicated to supporting Disneyland Forward and will be reimbursed by Disneyland, ensuring the costs do not fall on the City's General Fund. In response to Council Member Kurtz, Director Allen reported that the Planning Department would partner with the Economic Development Department in the private development improvement process and in the development of a Citywide proactive corridor enforcement program. He noted that Economic Development would help provide businesses with information on City regulations, available services, and resources, such as signage, trash enclosure and landscaping requirements, lighting programs, small business loans, and Chamber of Commerce services. He stated that the initial outreach would focus on education and connecting businesses with resources, followed by stronger enforcement after property issues are identified. Council Member Kurtz thanked staff for their work on improving the private development process, noting that Economic Development resources are stretched by major projects such as Disneyland Forward and OCVIBE. She expressed appreciation for efforts to improve the process and ensure businesses and developers are served effectively. Council Member Meeks stated that no additional Code Enforcement staffing is proposed for the current budget year but emphasized its importance to Anaheim's quality of life. She requested that staff evaluate potential staffing augmentation for next year's budget, including program needs, priorities, and anticipated improvements to services such as trash and property violations, hoarding cases, rental inspections, and street vendor enforcement. Director Allen noted that two vacant part-time positions were already being considered for consolidation into one full-time position to support the proactive Code Enforcement program. She stated that staff would reassess staffing needs as the program is retooled and return to Council as necessary. Mayor Pro Tern Leon thanked staff for their continued work and noted meetings with District 2 businesses regarding the permit process. He expressed support for the proposed permit process improvements and asked about the timeline for establishing short-, medium-, and long-term goals. Director Allen stated that, as part of the Economic Development Strategic Plan, the department will develop short-, medium-, and long-term strategies during the first year. She noted that a work plan would identify actions for the next 12 months and longer -term initiatives, including potential staffing and technology needs, with an updated work plan to be presented to Council in one year. City Council Minutes of June 23, 2026 Page 10 of 49 Mayor Pro Tern Leon emphasized the importance of streamlining the business permitting process for small businesses, entrepreneurs, and families, noting that delays can result in businesses paying rent while unable to open. He requested that staff communicate any needed Council support early. He asked whether the proposed proactive Code Enforcement program would include residential properties, citing concerns about vacant or deteriorated properties in the Brookhurst area of District 2. Director Allen clarified that the proactive Code Enforcement program primarily focuses on commercial corridors, while a separate program addressing vacant and abandoned properties is also underway and will likely focus on residential properties. She noted that Council had expanded the City Manager's authority for emergency nuisance abatement and is working to implement that authority through existing processes. Council Member Balius echoed Council Member Meeks' comments regarding Code Enforcement staff. He requested clarification on whether the reported inspection total represented unique properties or multiple inspections at the same job site, noting that the figure would equate to approximately 127 inspections per day if spread across 365 days. In response to Council Member Balius, Director Allen clarified that the figures only represent inspections performed by Building Inspectors and not inspections by the Public Works or Fire & Rescue Departments. Council Member Balius thanked Code Enforcement staff for their dedication. Council Member Rubalcava requested additional information on Senate Bill (SB) 1383's effects on the Public Works Department budget. Director Emami explained that there have been increases to the Department's rates due to SB 1383. He noted that the largest increase was due to the County's work at landfills to prepare for and process the requirements of SB 1383. In response to Council Member Rubalcava, Director Emami reported that most of the City's advocacy for SB 1383 was at the beginning of the bill's introduction. He noted that the bill included some modifications and highlighted negotiations with the County to reduce the impacts. He added that the City worked with Republic Services to control costs. He explained that the City is using reserves to help absorb and spread out increased costs, providing residents with a more gradual transition. Council Member Rubalcava inquired when the Republic Services contract expires. Director Emami reported that the Republic Services contract is an evergreen agreement, with the first 13 years guaranteed. He explained that after that period, the City would need to provide seven years' notice to terminate the contract. In response to Council Member Rubalcava, Director Emami explained that the contract allows for renegotiation when changes in law increase the contractor's costs. He stated that following the new waste requirements, the City engaged in an approximately 18-month negotiation process, including ride-alongs and a review of actual service costs, to determine the appropriate contract adjustment and secure the best possible rate for residents. Council Member Rubalcava asked whether costs are expected to continue increasing as the new waste requirements are implemented Citywide and whether those increases would affect the Republic Services contract. City Council Minutes of June 23, 2026 Page 11 of 49 Director Emami stated that the City does not anticipate further significant cost increases beyond standard CPI adjustments under the Republic contract. He explained that the major impacts from the waste hauler and County tipping fees have already occurred, with the remaining costs being phased in over five years. He noted that a new unfunded state mandate could result in additional costs. In response to Council Member Rubalcava, Director Emami explained that evergreen contracts are normal for trash services. He stated that the Republic Services contract's initial 13-year term followed by a seven-year notice period effectively provides a 20-year framework to allow Republic to recover its substantial upfront investment in collection and disposal infrastructure. He noted that the City retains enforcement mechanisms, including liquidated damages and performance improvement plans, and can require further improvements when necessary. Council Member Rubalcava thanked staff for improved waste collection service but emphasized the need to continue monitoring performance, particularly as organic waste separation is implemented in District 3 and its potential impact on apartment complexes and residents. She expressed appreciation for continued Public Utilities investments in grid reliability and neighborhood technology, noting Anaheim's preparedness for increased electrification. She acknowledged improvements in the Planning process and encouraged further efforts to streamline services for businesses, emphasizing that delays can have significant financial impacts. Mayor Aitken inquired how many individuals have been outsourced for large projects like OCVIBE and Disneyland Forward. Director Allen reported that the Disneyland Forward Enhanced Services Agreement authorized 15 positions across Planning, Building, Public Works, Development Services, and Fire. She noted that the positions are filled by experienced in-house staff, with recruitment underway to backfill their previous roles. She emphasized that OCVIBE does not have an enhanced services agreement and that the City's goal is to provide the same quality and timeliness of service to all projects, regardless of size. She acknowledged ongoing recruitment challenges and vacancies. In response to Mayor Aitken, Director Allen clarified that the Disneyland Forward Development Agreement contemplated an Enhanced Services Agreement, while OCVIBE did not. She noted that OCVIBE does receive consistent service from dedicated staff assignments, such as the same building inspectors and planners, although those staff also work on other projects and are not exclusively assigned to OCVIBE. Mayor Aitken requested an update on efforts to streamline service delivery for small and medium- sized businesses, including providing training for architects, planners, and business owners and assigning consistent inspection teams to avoid conflicting guidance from different inspectors. She inquired how these practices are being extended beyond OCVIBE to smaller businesses. Director Allen stated that the City strives to provide consistent inspections and next -day service while recognizing that inspector availability can affect assignments. She added that staff is providing additional training to improve consistency among inspectors and ensure continuity when staff are unavailable. She noted that inspectors have different specialties and that the ongoing process evaluation may identify opportunities to further improve consistency by having the same inspector provide feedback when feasible. Mayor Aitken asked whether the City provides businesses with an initial guide outlining the permitting process, required steps, and information for architects to help avoid conflicting guidance and project delays. City Council Minutes of June 23, 2026 Page 12 of 49 Director Allen acknowledged that the process does not currently exist but identified it as a priority, noting the need for a liaison to help customers navigate complex processes and regulations. Mayor Aitken emphasized the importance of educating both businesses owners and their professional teams about Anaheim's processes and requirements at the outset to prevent issues later in the development process. She congratulated the Building Official on his first year with the City and asked staff to assess staffing needs in light of the increasing responsibilities and demands placed on Code Enforcement and related services. Director Allen stated that Code Enforcement could benefit from several additional full-time officers, including staffing for a proactive commercial enforcement program, a strike team for vacant and abandoned properties, and additional personnel to conduct reinspections and ensure compliance. She requested consideration for a dedicated attorney for Code Enforcement, noting that the department currently relies on contract legal support. She noted that the Building Division is adequately staffed if vacancies are filled, though additional needs may arise as recruitment challenges are addressed. Mayor Aitken encouraged staff to continue communicating staffing needs, particularly for additional Code Enforcement officers and legal support. She emphasized the Department's high volume of resident complaints and the importance of providing adequate resources to address those concerns, noting that Code Enforcement represents a small portion of the City's overall budget. In response to Council Member Rubalcava, Director Allen explained that the Department's budget does not include allocations for attorneys. She stated that the City Attorney's Office budget includes an allocation of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds that covers the Planning Department's contract attorney costs. City Attorney Fabela stated that the requested legal support could be funded through CDBG funding and that bringing the function in-house could also allow the attorney to provide services to other areas of the City Attorney's Office not funded through CDBG funds. He expressed interest in continuing the discussion. Council Member Rubalcava supported bringing legal services in-house rather than relying on contracted services, citing efficiency and institutional knowledge. She emphasized the importance of adequately funding Planning, noting its significant impact on residents and businesses, and encouraged staff to identify funding opportunities in the current budget rather than delaying consideration. Interim City Manager Garcia acknowledged the Council's comments and stated that discussions are ongoing regarding staffing needs across Code Enforcement, Planning, and other departments. He explained that staff will continue evaluating opportunities to add positions and address needs through hiring decisions and supplemental budget adjustments throughout the year, even if changes are not included in the current budget. In response to Council Member Rubalcava, Interim City Manager Garcia explained that departments developed their initial staffing plans beginning in January, but Code Enforcement staffing needs were identified and discussed subsequently. He stated that additional Code Enforcement officers and City Attorney resources could be addressed during the fiscal year as funding becomes available, subject to revenues, expenditures, and the City's existing structural budget gap. Council Member Rubalcava suggested scheduling future budget workshops separately from the budget adoption meeting to allow sufficient time for questions and discussion. She reiterated the need to consider additional Code Enforcement staffing, noting that the issue had been discussed City Council Minutes of June 23, 2026 Page 13 of 49 previously and that available reserves could potentially support adding positions in the current budget. Interim City Manager Garcia stated that he would work with Director Allen to develop a plan for additional Code Enforcement staffing and determine the appropriate staffing level and associated costs before presenting a request to Council. Council Member Rubalcava emphasized the need to provide adequate resources and asked that the Department's needs be prioritized. Mayor Aitken encouraged staff to explore expanding staffing resources for the Planning Department. Director of Economic Development Sergio Ramirez reported that the Economic Development Department aims to improve the Anaheim economy and bring forth revitalization and new investments. He explained that services include but were not limited to supporting the expansion of the City's various economic engines, small businesses, and entrepreneurs; administering the Successor Agency to the former Anaheim Redevelopment Agency; improving business districts and commercial corridors, including revitalizing aging commercial centers through our Storefront Improvement Program; facilitating business investment through interdepartmental coordination, outreach, and collaboration; assisting the City with real estate negotiations and evaluations; and assisting with special projects and special initiatives identified by City management and City Council. He stated that the Department's staff consists of ten (10) full-time employees and no part-time staff. Director Ramirez stated that the Department's proposed budget is $41.6 million. He noted that nearly three-quarters of our budget is allocated to debt obligations of the former redevelopment agency and contractual obligations of the Successor Agency. He added that the total proposed budget represents 1.6% of the total Citywide budget, with the majority of budget revenues coming from the City's Private Purpose Trust Fund. He stated that the allocations per program area remain relatively unchanged from prior years. Director Ramirez reported that the budget, by expenditures, is comprised of 50% Debt Service, 6% for labor, and less than 1 % for Capital Outlays. He explained that the remaining 44%, in large part, is comprised of special property -related costs such as parking garage management, maintenance of Successor Agency properties, and property carrying costs such as insurance and common -area charges. He added that only a small portion of the Operating budget is available for core economic development functions such as business recruitment and retention, and small business support. Director Ramirez stated that the Department is proposing $2.5 million for administration and operational functions, including accounting, consultants, contract administration, and office overhead. He explained that the functions provide the administrative foundation that supports all department programs, projects, and services. Director Ramirez reported that the Business Development Division focuses on business attraction, retention, and expansion efforts while supporting entrepreneurs, coordinating with partner agencies, and helping businesses navigate City processes. He stated that the proposed budget for the Division was under $2 million. Director Ramirez stated that the Property Development Division, with a proposed budget of $6.2 million, manages the Successor Agency properties that are being prepared for sale. He noted that the Division also manages the Successor Agency assets, including parking garages, plazas, and other properties. He explained that the Division encourages development of underutilized sites, identifies development opportunities, responds to investment inquiries, and helps streamline the development process through interdepartmental coordination. City Council Minutes of June 23, 2026 Page 14 of 49 Director Ramirez noted that the Department also oversees the operations of the Successor Agency and manages the obligations under the State's Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule process (ROPs). He explained that the Department prepares the required state reports with the assistance of the Finance Department and outside consultants. He reported that the proposed budget was $30.6 million, with $20 million allocated to Debt Service and nearly $10 million allocated to contractually obligated activities and operations. Director Ramirez provided an overview of the Department's highlights. He noted that over the past year, the Department has been focused on meeting the Council's directive to deliver an Economic Development Strategic Plan. He shared that the process included robust stakeholder participation and engagement, adding that the Council adopted the Strategic Plan on June 9t". He stated that over the past year, the Department has facilitated business education programs, hosted community meetings and roundtables, participated in conferences and panels to market Anaheim opportunities, such as ICSC, or the International Conference of Shopping Centers, and worked directly with businesses and brokers to attract investment and fill vacancies throughout the City. He reported that in collaboration with Public Works, the Department kicked off the Commercial Corridor Clean Team Pilot Program through non-profit Chrysalis, which focuses on providing additional cleaning services to key commercial corridors in return for rent offset for the office building owned by the Successor Agency. He added that the Division also partnered with NAIOP for the evaluation of the Anaheim and Ball site to determine the highest and best use for the site. He shared that the Department is working with Public Works on a land swap and hopes to take the site out for RFP in the next year. He noted that in the Canyon, the property development team replaced monument signs that had been in place for over two decades. He stated that the signs have been refreshed and are beacons welcoming people to our city's largest industrial innovation district, the Anaheim Canyon. He reported that three years ago, City Council provided staff with the directive to develop and launch a program aimed at assisting businesses and shopping centers with exterior renovations. He noted that as a result, the Storefront Improvement Program was created, which highlights that the City is partnering with the business community for the revitalization of the City. He stated that to date, 15 project sites have been completed, and a total of 218 businesses within those retail centers have benefited. He added that 21 other project sites are under construction or in the pipeline, with over 213 applicants that are on the waiting list. He displayed one of the Storefront Projects in District 6, which received a $100,000 grant for rehabilitation, including facade renovations, asphalt repair, and landscaping. He stated that the property owner leveraged the City's grant and coupled it with their own private investment for a larger renovation of the entire center. He added that the center has secured a lease with Trader Joe's, the first in the City, which will be opening later in the year. Director Ramirez highlighted the 39 Commons project. He noted that over the past year, the Department has worked on obtaining the Local Enforcement Agency's clearance for the next phase of the former landfill site. He noted that the next phase would include In-N-Out, Dutch Bros, Dave's Hot Chicken, and other retailers. He announced that a groundbreaking ceremony would be held on June 30th. He highlighted the new Porsche Project on Lincoln Avenue. He noted that the Department celebrated the groundbreaking ceremony with executives from Porsche, the Council, and the City team. He stated that the deal included a complex transaction, negotiation and settlement with an adjacent owner, relocation of a jet fuel line, and other issues. Director of Housing and Community Development Grace Ruiz-Stepter announced that the Housing and Community Development Department's proposed FY 2026/27 budget supports a safer, stronger, and more livable Anaheim through continued investment in housing programs, homelessness solutions, workforce initiatives, and neighborhood improvements. She noted that the Department manages a broad range of programs and funding resources that support Anaheim residents and neighborhoods. She reported that the Department's core responsibilities include affordable housing development and preservation, rental assistance, homelessness response, workforce development, City Council Minutes of June 23, 2026 Page 15 of 49 and the administration of federal, state, and local funding programs. She stated that the proposed budget supports 83 full-time employees and just under 6 part-time positions. She added that the staffing complement would remain unchanged in the upcoming fiscal year. Director Ruiz-Stepter reported that the proposed FY 2026/27 budget totals approximately $234 million, representing about 9% of the City's overall budget. She noted that the majority of the funding, approximately $150 million, or 64%, is provided through the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and supports rental assistance and community development programs. She stated that the City's General Fund contribution is approximately $14 million and primarily supports departmental staffing, homelessness outreach efforts, and operation of the Anaheim Emergency Shelter. Director Ruiz-Stepter stated that the Department's two largest funds are the Anaheim Housing Authority Fund, which supports rental assistance and affordable housing programs, and the Grants and Homeless Initiatives Fund, which supports homelessness services and community development activities. She reported that the largest portions of the budget are associated with direct housing assistance and project -related activities. She noted that labor costs account for approximately 7% of the Department's overall budget. Director Ruiz-Stepter reported that the Workforce Development Division continues to provide employment services, career training, employer engagement, youth services, and workforce readiness programs to Anaheim residents. She noted that the services are all funded by State allocations and grant funds. Director Ruiz-Stepter highlighted the new Housing Downpayment Assistance section and highlighted the funding dedicated to the City's first-time homebuyer down payment assistance program. She reported that the Grants Management and Homeless Initiatives Division administers a wide range of federal and state grant programs. She provided examples of grants budgeted in this section, including the State allocation of the Homeless Assistance Prevention Program and our federal CDBG funds. Director Ruiz-Stepter reported that the Anaheim Housing Authority recently celebrated its 50th anniversary and remains the Department's largest operational unit. She noted that the 12% increase in labor costs primarily reflects recently approved wage adjustments. She reported that the Administration Division provides overall leadership, fiscal oversight, and operational support for the Department. She explained that there were no significant changes in the area. Director Ruiz-Stepter highlighted the Department's broader role within the City organization. She stated that in addition to the Department's direct service responsibilities, Housing and Community Development serves as a Citywide funding partner, securing and administering external resources that support priorities such as park improvements, Code Enforcement, and the Anaheim Fire Department's Advanced Provider Response Unit. Director Ruiz-Stepter highlighted the Department's accomplishments for major program areas. She noted that this year, the Department continued building out the Anaheim Housing Trust Fund and began delivering new programs to residents. She shared that the Department launched the My Anaheim Home Down Payment Assistance Program and the Stay Housed Anaheim Housing Stability Program, secured additional funding for the Trust Fund, and established a recurring revenue source expected to generate approximately $3 million annually. She explained that the results have been tangible, including the City's first down payment assistance home purchase, approximately 15 additional households in the pipeline, and nearly 60 families assisted through Stay Housed Anaheim. City Council Minutes of June 23, 2026 Page 16 of 49 Director Ruiz-Stepter reported that the Department continued to make significant progress in expanding affordable housing opportunities. She shared that a key accomplishment was the completion of the Azure Apartments, creating 89 new permanent supportive housing units for individuals exiting homelessness. She added that the Department continued advancing senior housing at Beach and Lincoln and housing for youth exiting foster care on State College Boulevard. She noted that in addition to developing new housing, the City was preserving existing affordability through strategic acquisition and rehabilitation efforts. She shared that this year, the Department advanced a significant acquisition in the Avon -Dakota neighborhood that will support long-term affordability and neighborhood revitalization. Director Ruiz-Stepter stated that this year, the Department continued to make progress in addressing homelessness by connecting individuals to shelter, housing, and supportive services while also responding to impacts in neighborhoods, parks, and other public spaces. She added that working closely with City departments, service providers, and regional partners, these efforts helped improve conditions in areas affected by homelessness and support a safer, more welcoming community. Director Ruiz-Stepter noted that beyond housing and homelessness, the Department continued to strengthen workforce opportunities for Anaheim residents through employer engagement, workforce partnerships, and community outreach. She stated that this year, staff engaged more than 230 Anaheim businesses while also building stronger relationships with local labor organizations and apprenticeship programs. She shared that a key outcome of this work is a regional career expo planned for September 2026 at the Anaheim Convention Center, in partnership with Santa Ana and the County of Orange, focused on apprenticeships, skilled trades, and other high -quality career pathways. Executive Director of Convention, Sports & Entertainment Tom Morton presented the Convention, Sports & Entertainment Department's FY 2026/27 budget. He reported that the Department is an enterprise fund that is responsible for managing the day-to-day operations of the Anaheim Convention Center and administers the City's agreements for Angel Stadium of Anaheim, Honda Center, the Grove of Anaheim, ARTIC, Visit Anaheim, and the Sportstown HomeOwners' Association. He reported that the Department budget includes 87 full-time employees, including one proposed increase, and 233 full-time equivalents. He explained that the 233 full-time equivalents represent an event -driven, part-time labor pool of approximately 543 employees, and almost 50% of all departmental employees are residents of Anaheim. Executive Director Morton reported that the departmental operating budget totals over $96 million, making up almost 4% of the overall City budget. He stated that Convention Center Operations represent 74% of the Department's overall budget. He added that Visit Anaheim, the City's destination marketing organization, receives approximately 22% of the budget by pass -through funding from a self -assessment district of hotels in the Anaheim Resort and Platinum Triangle, also known as the ATID. He explained that the shown change in Visit Anaheim's ATID funding was primarily attributable to the new Anaheim Housing Trust Fund, in support of the ATID area Workforce Housing Program. He stated that the two combined expenditures make up 96% of the Department's overall budget. He displayed the operating budget by expenditure class. He explained that most all labor denoted was Convention Center labor, and all `Other Operating' was primarily Visit Anaheim's pass -through ATID funds. Executive Director Morton stated that Convention Center Operations total $71 million, representing 74% of the Department's overall budget. He explained that the increase in budgeted expenditures is primarily attributable to increased event activity and related operational costs. He noted that during the current fiscal year, the Convention Center successfully hosted several annual events, including the NAMM show, Natural Products Expo West, Medical Design & Manufacturing, Cal Dental, VidCon, City Council Minutes of June 23, 2026 Page 17 of 49 and WonderCon. He added that the Convention Center hosted the Pokemon World Championships. He stated that the upcoming fiscal year will include the return of annual events, including BlizzCon and D23, with more than one million attendees anticipated throughout the year. He noted that the Convention Center was recognized for the seventh straight year by Exhibitor magazine as a 2026 Venue of Excellence and awarded the Best Convention Center in the country with over 1 million square feet of exhibit space. Executive Director Morton reported that Visit Anaheim, the City's destination marketing organization, receives approximately 22% of the overall Department budget, via pass -through funds from the ATID. He noted that key performance indicators in calendar year 2025 include 54 Citywide conventions booked, secured over 900,000 room nights, and had an economic impact of just over $2.3 billion. Executive Director Morton reported that the Stadium Operations total proposed budget was $3.4 million. He noted that the Stadium hosted 2.7 million fans in 2025 compared to the 2.62 million fans in 2024. He shared that the City anticipates that attendance in 2026 would be 2.6 million. Executive Director Morton stated that the Arena Operations total proposed budget was $609,000, which is comprised of labor allocations and overhead costs. He added that investment into the City - owned Honda Center, totaling over half a billion dollars, has begun. He congratulated the Anaheim Ducks on their recent Stanley Cup Playoff run into the second round. He noted that in the upcoming fiscal year, Honda Center projects to host 113 events, concerts, and shows, with an estimated attendance of over a million people. Executive Director Morton reported that Grove Operations' total proposed budget was $14,000. He noted that the Department would receive a guarantee of $750,000 for upcoming shows in the upcoming fiscal year. He highlighted the different artists and comedians scheduled to perform. Executive Director Morton stated that ARTIC Operations total over $230,000, mainly comprised of allocated overhead. He noted that in June, in partnership with OCTA and LA Metro, ARTIC would be providing point-to-point bus service to SoFi Stadium for the FIFA World Cup matches, and hosting a free World Cup Finals watch party on July 19'n Executive Director Morton provided a brief Olympic update, noting that Anaheim's Honda Center was slated to host LA28 Olympic men's and women's indoor volleyball every day from July 15 to July 30, 2028. He added that staff is also pursuing participation in the Olympic Torch Relay and hosting a live Olympic viewing site in the City. He added that the Council would need to consider agreements for the items, and to finalize the volleyball venue hosting costs to be reimbursed by LA28. DISCUSSION: In response to Council Member Kurtz, Director Ramirez reported that without the Successor Agency funds, the Economic Development Department's budget would decrease by 25%. Council Member Kurtz inquired about the planned sale or potential trade of the approximately 8 to 9- acre Successor Agency property located at Anaheim Boulevard and Ball Road and requested information on its current valuation. Director Ramirez stated that the property is valued at $30 million. In response to Council Member Kurtz, Director Ramirez reported that the City's portion would be 12%. Council Member Kurtz inquired how the costs are billed for managing and preparing Successor Agency properties for sale. City Council Minutes of June 23, 2026 Page 18 of 49 Director Ramirez explained that costs for managing and preparing Successor Agency properties for sale are included in the Long Range Property Management Plan budget but cannot be deducted from sale proceeds. He added that each taxing entity receives its respective share of the property's sale value. He noted that property management costs are significant due to required fencing, security, and, in some cases, 24-hour security. In response to Council Member Kurtz, Director Ramirez stated that property management is a large part of the Department's budget due to fencing and 24-hour security on some properties. Council Member Kurtz requested additional information on the management of the City's parking garages. Director Ramirez noted that the former Redevelopment Agency built five parking garages in District 3 as part of Project Area Alpha, which helped facilitate development in the Downtown/Center City area. He stated that the garages require ongoing maintenance and operations, as well as funding to address deferred maintenance needs. Council Member Meeks inquired if other individuals were in the process for the First -Time Homebuyer Down Payment Assistance Program. Director Ruiz-Stepter reported strong interest in the homeownership program since the application portal opened in December, with several hundred families expressing interest. She identified at least 15 viable applicants, with another potential closing expected within 30-60 days. She noted that applicants vary in readiness, including needs related to down payment assistance, credit, and financial literacy. Council Member Meeks noted that the homeownership program initially provided $50,000 in down payment assistance and expressed interest in monitoring whether that amount remains sufficient given housing costs. She asked staff to explain significant year -over -year increases in the proposed labor and operating budgets. Director Ruiz-Stepter explained that the budget slide is new and is still being refined to accurately present Anaheim Trust Fund programs. She noted a significant increase primarily reflects a large infusion of down payment assistance funding and associated costs, including financial literacy services and marketing materials, rather than solely additional staffing. She added that the presentation of Trust Fund expenditures remains a work in progress. Council Member Meeks requested additional information on the labor and operating budget components of the homeownership program, particularly the approximately $3 million in operating funds compared with the $50,000 assistance provided to each homebuyer. She requested additional information on how the funds are allocated, whether they will remain available for future applicants, and how the City can maximize the amount of funding directly benefiting residents and expanding homeownership opportunities. Council Member Rubalcava asked whether there is any duplication between the workforce development programs offered by the Economic Development Department and those administered by the Housing and Community Development Department. She requested information on the amount of funding allocated to these programs and how the departments coordinate their workforce development efforts. Director Ramirez clarified that the Economic Development Department's budget includes limited funding specifically for workforce development. He noted that he participates on the Workforce Development Board and collaborates closely with the Housing and Community Development City Council Minutes of June 23, 2026 Page 19 of 49 Department, including the Workforce Development Manager, to address business closures and other workforce needs. In response to Council Member Rubalcava, Director Ruiz-Stepter explained that the Housing and Community Development Department's Workforce Development program is a federally prescribed "one -stop shop" focused on preparing job seekers for employment and upskilling workers. She noted that while the program partners with businesses to connect residents with jobs, Economic Development primarily focuses on supporting businesses, expansion, and job creation. She emphasized that the two functions are complementary, working together to support both businesses and a prepared workforce. Council Member Rubalcava noted potential overlap in workforce readiness programs and suggested that Economic Development focus its limited resources on attracting businesses, generating tax revenue, and creating jobs. She encouraged the Housing and Community Development Department to increase outreach and marketing of its workforce development services so residents seeking employment or job -readiness assistance know where to seek resources. Director Ruiz-Stepter stated that the Housing and Community Development Department has attempted to increase its presence. She noted that the Department has resources available at all of the City libraries and information at all of the City's community centers. Council Member Rubalcava suggested outreach at youth programs and on social media. Director Ruiz-Stepter noted that the Department conducts outreach at job fairs held at least four or five times a year. She confirmed that the Department can work with the Public Information Office about ongoing advertisement. In response to Council Member Maahs, Director Ramirez explained that the Storefront Improvement Program slots can become available when selected businesses are unable to proceed, such as when a business drops out during the bidding process or a property is sold and the new owner chooses not to continue. He stated that the City works closely with businesses throughout the process and uses a waiting list to fill vacancies when slots open. Council Member Maahs inquired if funding was still available in the program. Director Ramirez explained that funding is still available; however, the funding would cease after the current year. He noted that staff anticipates requesting funding during the next budget cycle. In response to Council Member Maahs, Director Ramirez reported that the City of Long Beach's Economic Development Department has approximately 99 employees, and the City of Ontario's Economic Development Department has approximately 50 employees. He clarified that workforce development was not part of the Long Beach Economic Development Department. Council Member Maahs inquired if the Workforce Development Department has any programs available for older adults reentering the workforce. Director Ruiz-Stepter explained that Workforce does not have a dedicated program for older adults; however, they have access to all of the Workforce Development programs offered. Council Member Kurtz inquired if housing inspections are conducted by the Housing and Community Development Department or Code Enforcement. Director Ruiz-Stepter explained that the housing inspections are conducted by contractors in accordance with HUD standards. City Council Minutes of June 23, 2026 Page 20 of 49 Council Member Kurtz requested clarification regarding the down payment assistance program, emphasizing that the Anaheim Local Housing Trust and Resort Housing Trust funds must remain separate from the City's regular General Fund budget. She noted that the Housing and Community Development Department administers both housing trusts. Director Ruiz-Stepter clarified that the Resort Housing Trust is a subset of the broader Trust Fund program with its own funding parameters. She emphasized that the funds must be tracked separately, although they collectively comprise the City's overall Trust Fund program. In response to Council Member Kurtz, Director Ruiz-Stepter confirmed that the funding is separate from the General Fund. She clarified that the recurring ATID funding source must be used specifically for employees of ATID-assessed properties. She also confirmed that the Anaheim Housing Trust does not currently have a recurring source of funding. Council Member Maahs commended the Housing and Community Development Department for its work overseeing rental assistance, first-time homebuyer programs, emergency shelter funding, affordable housing, transitional and permanent supportive housing, and efforts to increase the housing supply. She requested a future presentation on the state of homelessness in Anaheim. Mayor Pro Tern Leon thanked the Housing and Community Development Department staff for their continued work addressing homelessness and requested an update on the Mexicasa property adjacent to the Kettle Motor Motel. He asked whether the City has identified other problem motels throughout Anaheim and whether there is a strategic plan to address or potentially acquire those properties, including motels along Lincoln Avenue in District 2. Director Ruiz-Stepter stated that the City periodically obtains a list from the Police Department identifying motels with high calls for service to help identify potential acquisition opportunities. She explained that the City's strategy is to prioritize properties where it can address nuisance conditions, improve the surrounding community, and develop affordable housing. She reported that continued acquisitions would depend largely on the availability of state and federal grant funding due to the high cost of acquiring some properties. Mayor Pro Tern Leon requested that staff consider incorporating strategies for addressing problem motels into the City's planning for funds once the LPMR bond funds have been paid off. In response to Council Member Balius, Director Ruiz-Stepter stated that uncertainty remains about State and federal funding, although all Department programs remained funded at existing levels during the previous year. She noted that maintaining status quo funding can still result in reductions, particularly for rental assistance programs, but current programs remain secure while future funding remains uncertain. Mayor Aitken thanked the Housing and Community Development Department's staff for their assistance during the legislative session in advocating for Housing Assistance Program (HAP) funding. She highlighted the success of securing more than $900 million in funding, which would help preserve program beds, and expressed appreciation for staff's ongoing support and timely information. Mayor Pro Tern Leon thanked Convention, Sports & Entertainment staff for their work in accommodating the City's large number of annual visitors. He requested an update on the City's planning and preparations for the 2028 Olympic and Paralympic Games in Los Angeles. Executive Director Morton stated that the City has been working with LA 28 for several years. He noted that later in the year, Council is expected to consider an Enhanced Cities Resource Master City Council Minutes of June 23, 2026 Page 21 of 49 Agreement covering additional City costs associated with the Olympic and Paralympic events, as well as potential agreements for a torch relay and a fan festival/live site. Mayor Pro Tern Leon requested an update on the timelines for contracts related to LA 28 and progress in preparation for the Olympics. He inquired about the estimated number of attendees or visitors the City expects due to the Olympics. Executive Director Morton estimated that the volleyball events could generate at least 3,500 hotel room nights per night, potentially exceeding 5,000 during the opening period. He explained that with up to four events per day and capacities of approximately 18,000 attendees per event, staff anticipates roughly 80,000 visitors per day over a 15-day period. In response to Mayor Pro Tern Leon, Executive Director Morton reported that the City's largest trade show, Natural Products Expo, brings in an estimated 80,000 people. He added that the Olympics would bring in similar numbers for a few weeks. Mayor Pro Tem Leon requested periodic updates on LA 28 planning and asked staff to identify any actions Council could take proactively, including outreach to representatives or assistance in resolving potential issues, given the anticipated significant increase in visitors to Anaheim. Council Member Rubalcava emphasized that planning for the 2028 Games should prioritize minimizing impacts on Anaheim residents while accommodating the anticipated influx of visitors. She questioned the decrease in Visit Anaheim's proposed budget to approximately $20.9 million and asked whether the reduction was related to the transfer of funds to the Housing Trust or another factor. Executive Director Morton explained that the reduction was due to the Housing Trust Fund set -aside. He noted that revenues have been consistent with previous years' revenues and that the Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) component with the City was doing well. In response to Council Member Rubalcava, Executive Director Morton reported that the Housing Trust receives 9% of the monthly gross revenue. He clarified that the ATID assessment is 2% of hotel room revenue, with 9% designed for housing. Council Member Rubalcava questioned whether Visit Anaheim is effectively marketing the City and generating increased tourism and ATID revenue, noting that greater performance would result in increased funding returning to the organization. She inquired whether Visit Anaheim is meeting its obligations and whether the City is experiencing any performance concerns. Executive Director Morton highlighted Visit Anaheim as a great partner for the Convention Center. He noted that the City is seeing great pace for Convention Center Citywide bookings and TOT. In response to Council Member Rubalcava, Executive Director Morton stated that Visit Anaheim's performance is supported by a combination of large conventions that drive room rates and occupancy and smaller conventions that help maintain consistent hotel demand. He noted that the ACC North expansion has allowed the City to accommodate overlapping conventions and that Visit Anaheim is booking events up to 10 years in advance. He added that more than 55 Citywide conventions were booked during the last calendar year, with 31 scheduled for the current year, contributing to record - setting convention activity. He stated that the Visit Anaheim budget was conservative and could increase based on actualized ATID revenues. Council Member Rubalcava questioned why Visit Anaheim's budget was decreasing despite the City's tourism revenue and expressed the view that effective marketing should result in continued City Council Minutes of June 23, 2026 Page 22 of 49 growth. She stated that Visit Anaheim's performance and allocation of resources should continue to be monitored, particularly regarding activities such as workforce development that may fall outside its core tourism -marketing role. In response to Council Member Rubalcava, Executive Director Morton explained that the Department is not subsidized by the General Fund. He noted that the Department is an enterprise fund that generates revenues to offset expenses. He noted that the Convention Center generates significant revenue from hosted events, estimated at approximately $30 million to $50 million annually, and indicated there were no additional concerns to report regarding the expense side. Council Member Meeks inquired whether leisure -oriented conventions and events, such as Pokemon, WonderCon, and BlizzCon, generate benefits to the City comparable to traditional business conventions. Executive Director Morton stated that leisure conventions such as WonderCon generate significant economic activity and hotel stays, although attendees may share rooms more often than business convention travelers. He noted that both leisure and business conventions provide substantial economic benefits to the City. In response to Council Member Rubalcava, Executive Director Morton emphasized that the City's tourism strategy considers the overall economic impact, with ATID revenue serving as a major component. He noted that consumer -oriented conventions benefit the Convention Center through rental revenue that helps offset expenses, while contributing to the broader tourism ecosystem. At 5:16 P.M., the City Council took a brief recess and reconvened at 5:26 P.M. INVOCATION: Pastor Ryan Cheung, Chinese Baptist Church of Orange County Mayor Pro Tem Leon reflected on the upcoming 250th Anniversary of the United States. He emphasized unity and shared experiences as the world celebrates the World Cup. He expressed appreciation for public safety personnel, service members, and others who help keep communities and the nation safe. FLAG SALUTE: Mayor Pro Tem Carlos A. Leon PRESENTATIONS: Recognizing The Quick Track Club, a group of 7 youth athletes who competed at the USATF Junior Olympic Cross Country Championships in Shelbyville, Indiana Mayor Aitken recognized The Quick Track Club for their outstanding performances at the USA Track and Field Junior Olympic Cross Country Championships in Indiana. She noted that qualifying for the event was a significant achievement. She shared that Anaheim runners earned strong individual and team results, including Eleanor Ramos, National Champion in the 8 and under girls' division; Taylor Sojourn, third in the 8 and under girls' division; Brooklynn Chiya, finishing 34th in the 8 and under girls division; Vida Ramos, finishing 7th in the 9-10 girls division; Olivia Weinraub, 801h out of 248 runners; Ella Haneishi, finishing 251h out of 300 in the 11-12 girls division; and Samuel Weinraub, finishing 31 out of 368 athletes in the 11-12 boys division. A Quick Track Club coach praised the Anaheim youth athletes for their exceptional national -level accomplishments, emphasizing the difficulty of becoming a champion at any level, particularly competing against the best athletes in the country. He highlighted the athletes' dedication, work ethic, perseverance, and positive attitude, noting that their commitment and achievements inspire the City Council Minutes of June 23, 2026 Page 23 of 49 community. He congratulated the athletes and their families and coaches for supporting them throughout their journey. Recognizing Anaheim Public Utilities High School Scholarship Recipients Mayor Aitken recognized the 2026 Anaheim Public Utilities Scholarship recipients, highlighting the City's scholarship program supporting outstanding high school seniors pursuing careers in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). She reported that the program awards $6,000 to the first -place recipient, provides scholarship support to additional finalists, and offers recipients opportunities for paid internships with Anaheim Public Utilities through the City's workforce development team. She recognized Eva Garcia of Anaheim High School, Halle Chan from Loara High School, George Colorado from Anaheim High School, and Sarah Kirby from Cambridge Virtual Academy. She also recognized Ngoc Nguyen from Katella High School, who could not attend. She noted that the internships provide students with firsthand experience in delivering reliable electricity and high -quality water services to the community. ACCEPTANCE OF OTHER RECOGNITIONS (To be presented at a later date): Recognizing June 19. 2026. as Juneteenth National Independence Day Recognizing June 20, 2026, as World Refugee Day Recognizing June 14-20, 2026, as National Flag Week At 5:40 P.M., Mayor Aitken called to order the Anaheim Housing Authority, in joint session with the City Council. ADDITIONS/DELETIONS TO THE AGENDAS: City Clerk Theresa Bass reported that as noted on the agenda, staff requested to withdraw Item No. 20 from the agenda and announced that Public Hearing Item No. 24-L was withdrawn by staff. PUBLIC COMMENTS all agenda items. except public hearings): Prior to receipt of public comments, City Clerk Theresa Bass provided an outline of procedures for public comments, notice of translation services, and a brief decorum statement. City Clerk Theresa Bass reported that a total of forty-four (44) public comments were received electronically prior to 1:00 P.M. [A final total of seventy-seven (77) public comments were received electronically, distributed to the City Council, and made part of the official records]. — See Appendix. R. Joshua Collins expressed concerns regarding the City's anti -camping policies, including reports of personal property being confiscated and not returned. He questioned the disposition of approximately 10,000 items reportedly not returned to individuals. He advocated for increased affordable housing for vulnerable populations, including seniors, families, people with disabilities, and individuals experiencing mental illness or homelessness. He called for increased police training related to homelessness and mental health, greater community involvement in police hiring, and additional measures to address alleged racial disparities in police stops and arrests. He referenced the death of Albert Arzola and urged the City to take corrective action, release relevant video or information, and address potential liability concerns. Ben Hurst, Director of The Salvation Army's Center of Hope in Anaheim, shared a success story of a former Anaheim resident who experienced homelessness for approximately 10 years before being connected to the City's services and Anaheim Emergency Shelter. He noted that through shelter services, job placement assistance, and supportive care, the individual obtained employment, City Council Minutes of June 23, 2026 Page 24 of 49 secured permanent housing, and transitioned to independent living. He highlighted the City's investment in the Center of Hope and broader homeless response system, noting that 42 shelter residents were placed into permanent housing at the Azure Apartments in February. He stated that Anaheim's approach to homelessness has received positive recognition from service providers nationwide and emphasized the significant impact of the City's shelter and supportive services. Miles Bernal shared his experience entering The Salvation Army Center of Hope while homeless and securing employment at Angel Stadium within two weeks. He shared that he has since obtained permanent housing at the Azure Apartments and now serves as president of a network focused on employment and development, helping others transition out of homelessness. He thanked the City Council for its continued support. Christine Lopez called for greater transparency and accountability regarding his death. She questioned City spending and vacant properties, advocated for rent control and additional residential parking, and criticized the use of surveillance drones. She called for the release of complete, unedited footage related to Albert Arzola's death and urged the City to hold the involved officers accountable. Matthew Compton called for accountability regarding the death of Albert Arzola and urged the City to terminate the employment of the involved Anaheim Police Department officer. He cited a petition that had received more than 1,000 signatures, with a majority reportedly from Anaheim residents, and referenced several historical police -involved deaths in Anaheim. He criticized a lack of accountability and urged the City Council to take action. Grace Arzola called for greater investment in Anaheim's youth and community programs, particularly proactive summer activities and outreach in neighborhoods. She criticized the Anaheim Police Department's use of force and police practices, questioned the use of officer cameras and drones, and expressed concerns about community trust and police accountability. She urged the City prioritize prevention, youth engagement, and community -based solutions rather than punitive measures. She called for justice in the death of her nephew Albert Arzola. Cecil Jordan Corkern urged increased security and screening measures at Disney properties, particularly if future development occurs, and requested assistance from City staff with organizing and typing the reports into the issues. Ruben Greg Soto expressed concerns about being tested or challenged by others, stated that their First Amendment rights had been violated, and referenced their personal mental health history. He expressed frustration about not receiving adequate support from the government. Mark Richard Daniels reflected on the upcoming 250th Anniversary of the United States and Anaheim's upcoming 150th Anniversary of incorporation, emphasizing the importance of recognizing the country and City's history despite ongoing challenges. He urged the community and City leaders to support residents facing hardship, particularly people experiencing homelessness, and called for greater compassion and outreach to those struggling in the community. Anonymous (Card No. 7480) urged the City to address significant compensation disparities for Anaheim Convention Center duty managers. He explained that duty managers oversee large numbers of people, vendors, employees, security, emergencies, and facility operations, while serving as on -site backups to event managers and having authority to close the Convention Center in extreme situations. He stated that duty managers are the Convention Center's lowest -paid employees at $22.84 per hour, have received no raise since 2016, and work part-time without benefits. He stated that duty managers' responsibilities have continued to increase while their compensation has not kept pace with the cost of living. He added that duty managers were excluded City Council Minutes of June 23, 2026 Page 25 of 49 when other Convention Center employees joined a union and that their unanimous effort to join the union in 2024 was denied by the City. Mazatl Tepehyolotzin thanked community members for participating in a recent neighborhood meeting and emphasized the importance of listening to residents, particularly families in Anaheim's neighborhoods. He raised concerns about dangerous conditions along railroad tracks near Olive and Vermont, including pedestrian safety, needles, and children crossing the tracks, and advocated for a walking and bicycle trail with fencing. He called for additional community amenities, including skate parks and improved restrooms, and emphasized preserving neighborhood history and culture. He raised concerns about discrimination, substance abuse, domestic violence, and police interactions in the community, while advocating for neighborhood improvements and more drought -tolerant landscaping. Sergio Pelayo expressed grief over the death of Albert Arzola and called for the release of his autopsy and information regarding the official cause of death. He questioned the circumstances surrounding the incident, particularly the alleged lack of body -camera footage and audio from the involved officer's partner, and emphasized the trauma experienced by Albert's 14-year-old cousin, who witnessed the shooting. He urged for greater transparency and accountability from the City and law enforcement. Pearl Arzola reported that a petition has received 1,013 verified signatures supporting the release of unreleased body -camera footage, the full incident report, and an explanation for why the second officer's body camera was not activated in the death of Albert Arzola. She criticized the City for a lack of transparency and urged the City Council to provide the requested information to the public. She questioned the Council's relationship with the Anaheim Police Department and called for greater accountability to Anaheim residents. Art Castillo raised concerns about alleged police misconduct, mistreatment of young people, and possible corruption based on experiences dating back to the 1970s and 1990s. He described a case involving a young student whom he believed was wrongly prosecuted and argued that some criminal cases should be expunged. He called for greater scrutiny and accountability of officers accused of misconduct. He offered to share additional information with the City Council about alleged problems and urged local businesses to become more involved in supporting Anaheim communities. Tom Fielder raised concerns about PFAS contamination and drinking -water safety, particularly the potential impact on residents with compromised immune systems. He questioned whether the City adequately warned residents about PFAS exposure associated with Well 51, which they stated operated for 74 days before being taken offline. He criticized the City's Annual Water Quality Report for not mentioning Well 51 and questioned why the information was not publicly disclosed. He called on the City Council to conduct an independent audit or investigation into the matter, determine who was responsible for the lack of disclosure, and provide greater transparency regarding residents' exposure and water safety. Marc Herbert criticized the City Council's discussion of restoring the Angels' name, arguing that residents are more concerned with accountability, public safety, housing, and other community issues than team branding. He expressed concerns about the City's history of stadium negotiations and alleged a continuing lack of transparency, including limited public access to commissions and boards, delayed accountability, and difficulties obtaining public records. He questioned whether the City has learned from past stadium -related controversies and whether residents should trust City Hall to negotiate another major development agreement. He urged the Council to prioritize residents' concerns, including supporting the Arzola family City Council Minutes of June 23, 2026 Page 26 of 49 Mike Robbins raised allegations of improper water treatment practices and called for an independent investigation. He claimed that a valve reopened in September 2025 and released organic material into the treatment process, causing brown water in Anaheim Hills, and alleged that staff continued operating the valve despite employee concerns. He added that additional chlorine increased trihalomethane (THM) levels and that excessive flushing was conducted before state compliance testing, potentially affecting water -quality sampling results. He criticized the omission of these events from the City's water quality report and urged the City Council to investigate the allegations, release its findings publicly, and ensure the safety and transparency of Anaheim's drinking water system. Georgia Price stated that integrity and accountability must start with City leadership and expressed concern that employees who raise concerns or challenge questionable decisions are retaliated against, while those responsible for poor decisions may be rewarded. She criticized the City Council's handling of alleged misconduct by a former city manager and argued that failing to address such issues contributes to a culture of insufficient accountability. She referenced ongoing concerns involving drinking water, Dig Alert violations, fireworks contamination, and other alleged cover-ups, urging the Council to demonstrate stronger leadership, transparency, and oversight. Jeanine Robbins questioned the City's oversight of professional services agreements and other contracts, arguing that simply posting contracts online does not ensure transparency or accountability. She called for greater scrutiny of whether contracts provide value, are appropriately awarded, meet their stated scopes, and deliver the promised results. She questioned the City's use of Brown and Caldwell auditors at the Lenain Water Treatment Plant, particularly whether the audit adequately examines laboratory data, treatment operations, compliance practices, and alleged excessive flushing before water -quality testing. She urged stronger financial and operational oversight and concluded by calling for stricter police body -camera requirements and disciplinary action for officers who fail to keep cameras activated. Stephanie Mercadante stated that family and close personal relationships between City Council members and municipal employees can create perceived pressure and influence over personnel decisions, even without direct authority. She expressed concern that employees may believe certain individuals receive preferential treatment or are protected because of their connections to City leadership. She urged the Council to recognize the impact of these relationships on employee morale, accountability, and public trust, emphasizing that consistent standards must apply regardless of an employee's proximity to political power. Dave Duran criticized the City's financial management, stating that Anaheim faced budget deficits of approximately $60 million and $40 million over two consecutive years. He questioned increases for Executive Management that were not adequately presented or debated publicly and noted significant increases for Executive Management members. He questioned the City's reliance on one-time funding sources to balance the budget and called for a long-term strategy to address the structural deficit. He raised additional concerns about the City's purchasing -card program and approximately $10 million in employee purchases between 2023 and 2025. Jack Williams, Public Affairs Specialist for the U.S. Small Business Administration, announced federally funded assistance for businesses and organizations affected by the May 21-29 hazmat incident in Orange County and surrounding declared counties. He explained that the programs offer economic injury disaster loans of up to $2 million for eligible small businesses, agricultural cooperatives, and nonprofits, with interest rates as low as 3.6% for nonprofits and 4% for businesses and terms of up to 30 years. He noted that businesses do not need to have suffered physical damage to qualify; losses from evacuations, reduced customer traffic, employee disruptions, or supply -chain impacts may also qualify. He stated that the application deadline is March 11, 2027. He added that the Small Business Administration is coordinating with Anaheim officials and plans to conduct City Council Minutes of June 23, 2026 Page 27 of 49 outreach, workshops, and business -resource events, with assistance available through Business Recovery Centers and a Mobile Recovery Vehicle. In response to Mayor Aitken, Mr. Williams shared that additional information is available by telephone at 1-800-659-2955, and on the Disaster Customer Service website. He emphasized that the application process is straightforward and that SBA representatives will remain in the community for the next several months to assist impacted residents and businesses. Rosie Camacho expressed grief over the death of her son Albert Arzola and called for justice, transparency, and accountability. She thanked the Community Service Organization (CSO) for helping the family's petition gather more than 1,000 signatures and thanked community members for their neighborhood support. She called for the release of all body -camera footage and the 911 call from the incident, questioning why a second officer's body camera was not activated. She alleged harassment by the Police Department and expressed concern about how Anaheim police respond to young people experiencing mental -health crises. She advocated for a bike trail to support youth mental health and urged the City to take greater steps to protect and engage young people in the community. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS: Council Member Kurtz reported her attendance at a few events including a groundbreaking the Center Applied Research Innovation at The Salvation Army, a Police Foundation dinner for the Mounted Police efforts, a Flag Day celebration, a Senior Care 101 event held in collaboration with Council Member Maahs, and Anaheim's Youth LA28 kick-off. She highlighted the District 4 community meeting and the turnout. She thanked Community Services and each of the City departments for participating and residents for attending the meeting. Council Member Kurtz shared that a cleanup was held in the Orange Olive neighborhood. She highlighted Public Utilities General Manager Dukku Lee and thanked AMEA and OCEA for bringing a hot dog wagon to feed the participants. Council Member Maahs thanked the City departments that provided resources at the Senior Care 101 event. She shared that the event received positive feedback with hopes to hold another. Council Member Maahs highlighted the 50t" Anniversary of the Sunkist Library. She noted that they hold a monthly senior art class. She thanked Director of Community Services Sjany Larson -Cash and Library staff for their work. She congratulated the Library for receiving an award from the American Library Association, in recognition of its public relations efforts and promoting different books and reading programs. She mentioned that the public can visit their local library branch and check out a State Parks Pass. She stated that the pass is valid for three weeks and the public can check out hiking gear at the library. Council Member Maahs reported that she was invited to a neighborhood cleanup by the Anaheim Rotary Club and thanked the Club for organizing the event. She shared that they have organized the event for over 13 years and thanked them for working with resident leaders. She added that Code Enforcement, Neighborhood Services, and the Police Department joined the cleanup efforts. Council Member Maahs announced a cleanup on Saturday, June 27t" at Edison Park from 9 a.m. to 10 a.m. She noted that supplies are available and encouraged attendees to wear closed -toe shoes. Council Member Maahs announced a Concert in the Park at Pioneer Park on Thursday, June 25t" at 6:30 p.m. She noted that the concert would feature The Convertibles performing pop, rock, R&B, soul, and Motown music. Council Member Maahs shared that a Sensory with a Patch event, in collaboration with first responders, at Zion Lutheran Church from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. She noted that the event builds on efforts initiated by Mayor Pro Tern Leon and is intended to strengthen relationships between the special needs community and public safety personnel. She added that the event would provide opportunities for participants to interact with first responders, access community resources, and enjoy activities. City Council Minutes of June 23, 2026 Page 28 of 49 Mayor Pro Tern Leon announced his attendance at the swearing -in ceremony for the newly elected officers of the American Legion Post 72, the Sons of the American Legion, and the Auxiliary Unit. He highlighted the importance of the events to support fellow veterans and preserve the legacy of military service and strengthen the community. He congratulated the officers and thanked the veterans for their service and continued leadership. Mayor Pro Tern Leon highlighted The Salvation Army's Center for Applied Research and Innovation groundbreaking ceremony. He noted that the Center represents an important investment in expanding services and improving outcomes for individuals experiencing homelessness. He thanked The Salvation Army and the City's partners for their leadership and dedication. Mayor Pro Tern Leon shared that he joined Anaheim students for the LA28's Day of Sport. He noted the excitement surrounding the upcoming Olympics and thanked the Community Services Department for organizing the event. Mayor Pro Tern Leon announced that OCTA recently adopted their $2 billion budget. He noted that Anaheim is receiving significant investment in infrastructure and transit services, including freeway improvements, bus operations, senior mobility programs, safer transit stops, and traffic signal coordination throughout the City. He highlighted Project J, the State Route 91 Eastbound Corridor Project, to add a general-purpose lane between the 241 and the 1-15. He noted that although the project is led by the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC), it would improve traffic flow between the Orange County line and the 71. He noted that the project is an example of how the City continues working with regional partners, continued advocacy to address transportation and infrastructure concerns, and continued investment in bus service and mobility programs. Mayor Pro Tern Leon requested to adjourn the meeting in memory of Darnell (DJ) Jones. He shared that he was a kind and caring 10th-grade student at Magnolia High School. He highlighted his determination and resilience, particularly during a transition to Magnolia High School. He stated that outside of the classroom, DJ loved playing basketball and brought his passion to the Boys and Girls Club of Anaheim. He shared DJ's excitement to join the basketball team and highlighted his respect and gentle nature toward classmates, teachers, Magnolia High School staff, and the community. Council Member Balius announced a groundbreaking at 39 Commons on Tuesday, June 30'h at 10 a.m. He invited the public to attend and highlighted the upcoming In-N-Out, Dave's Hot Chicken, and Dutch Bros Coffee. He wished everyone a Happy Fourth of July and encouraged the public to celebrate safely. Council Member Rubalcava introduced her office's new Council Aide, Brianna Aranjo. She shared that she grew up in Anaheim and graduated from Anaheim High School in 2022. She added that Brianna's parents immigrated from Jalisco and Zacatecas and highlighted her deep roots. Council Member Rubalcava highlighted students at Horace Mann Elementary School who approached her regarding a public safety concern at a crosswalk on Citron. She shared that the students gathered hundreds of signatures from students and neighbors regarding the crosswalk. She thanked the City's Traffic Safety Division, including Traffic Engineer Rafael Cobian, and the Police Department for addressing the issue. She noted that she has received additional requests regarding other stop signs and requested blinking stop signs in the community. Council Member Rubalcava noted that the Flag Day ceremony took place in District 3 and thanked non-profit and local community leaders for organizing the event. She explained that it is not a City -led event; however, many Council Members and the Community Services Department sponsor the event. She highlighted the value the event has for students and residents to display pride in the County. Council Member Rubalcava noted that an essay contest is held as part of the Flag Day celebrations. She shared that District 3 Vibrant Minds Charter School student Nigel Bonnenberger, was the winner of the contest. Council Member Rubalcava highlighted the recipients of her District 3 scholarship program. She thanked Council Services Coordinator Starla Huerta and Police Lieutenant Steve Pena for reviewing the essay submissions and helping select the winners. She announced the winners: Emily Valdez, Noah Valenzuela, Jose Valle, Mariella Jones, and Valeria Gutierrez. Council Member Rubalcava thanked staff for attending the District 3 community meeting. She highlighted the new open house format, City Council Minutes of June 23, 2026 Page 29 of 49 which allows residents to speak to each department and ask questions. Council Member Rubalcava requested to adjourn the meeting in memory of lifelong Anaheim resident and District 3 resident, Paul Samuel Hinojosa and expressed her condolences to his family. Mayor Aitken thanked the Fire and Rescue Department for inviting her to meet the new peer support canine, Riley. She highlighted Riley's role in providing comfort and support to firefighters and community members during stressful situations. She expressed her appreciation for Engineer Gillaspie for caring for Riley as part of the Department's wellness and community outreach efforts. Mayor Aitken shared that she attended the USA -Paraguay World Cup game. She highlighted OCTA and Metrolink for providing a bus service to SoFi Stadium. She expressed support for offering similar services for future events at SoFi Stadium. She thanked the Flag Day Committee for organizing the Flag Day event and the staff who assisted. Mayor Aitken highlighted the District Open Houses and thanked everyone in the community who attended. She thanked Code Enforcement for bringing a television to the District 5 meeting to watch the World Cup. Mayor Aitken announced that on Thursday, June 25, there would be a community wildfire meeting from 6 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. at the East Anaheim Community Center. She wished everyone a Happy Father's Day. She acknowledged and expressed appreciation for fathers throughout the community and City organization, recognizing their support, dedication, and positive contributions to their families. CITY MANAGER'S UPDATE: Interim City Manager Greg Garcia announced that, as presented at the June 9, 2026 Council meeting, the City was taking a tougher stance on illegal fireworks. He noted increased patrols on the ground and in the air. He reported that citations have already been issued and staff are utilizing every tool to keep the community safe. He noted that signs have been installed at each City park prohibiting fireworks. He added that digital message boards have been deployed on the City's roadways. Residents could report illegal fireworks by calling 714-765-1900 or online on the City's website. Interim City Manager Garcia reported that safe and sane fireworks were the only fireworks allowed in the City. He explained the fireworks are permitted on July 4th between 10 a.m. and 10 p.m. He announced that nonprofits and high schools would be fundraising by selling safe and sane fireworks throughout the City beginning Sunday, June 28th, through Saturday, July 41h. He stated that stand locations are available on the City's website. Interim City Manager Garcia encouraged the public to attend Anaheim's Fourth of July celebration. He noted that the day would begin with the Firecracker 5K and 10K at 7 a.m., followed by the Yankee Doodle Dog Show at 9 a.m., and the Patriotic Parade at 1 p.m. He announced that the fireworks show would begin at 9 p.m. at Peralta Canyon Park. He stated that additional information on the event was available on the City's website. Interim City Manager Garcia wished his youngest son a Happy 12th Birthday. At 7:22 p.m. Mayor Aitken recessed the City Council to address the Anaheim Housing Authority agenda, and reconvened at 7:23 p.m. CONSENT CALENDAR: At 7:23 p.m., the consent calendar was considered with Council Member Rubalcava pulling Item No. 18, Mayor Pro Tern Leon pulling Item Nos. 7 and 16, and Council Member Balius pulling Item No. 17 for separate consideration. MOTION: Council Member Balius moved to waive reading of the ordinances and resolution and adopt the balance of the consent calendar as presented, in accordance with reports, certifications, and recommendations furnished each City Council Member, seconded by Mayor Pro Tern Leon. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES — 7 (Mayor Aitken and Council Members Leon, Balius, Rubalcava, Kurtz, Maahs, and Meeks); NOES — 0. Motion carried. City Council Minutes of June 23, 2026 Page 30 of 49 B105 3. Receive and file minutes of the Library Board meeting of May 11, 2026; the Public Utilities Board meeting of April 22, 2026; and the Sister City Commission meeting of April 27, 2026. B105 4. Receive and file the Budget, Investment, and Technology Commission's recommendation letter dated June 10, 2026 regarding the Fiscal Year 2026/27 Proposed Budget. D116 5. Ratify a certificate recognizing George J. Gilliam, Elena Gilliam, Dr. Cynthia Smith, and Creative Identity in recognition of Creative Identity's 30th Anniversary of service to adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities; approve certificates recognizing the following: Logan Ostaszewski, Antonella Villa, and Shane Wexelman, students from an Anaheim Ballet Studio who represented Anaheim in a Ballet Competition; Comunidad Madres Ponderosa for their contributions to their neighborhood; Leonardo Salazar for his accomplishments in Muay Thai; Servite High School's Golf and Track and Field teams for their CIF Championships; Marie Antoineta Bueno in honor of her 100th Birthday; and Angie Beccia in honor of her 100th Birthday; and approve a proclamation recognizing Hot Car Awareness Day. D116 6• Receive and file, with the possibility of discussion, the list of Professional Services Agreements authorized by the City Manager for May 2026. AGR-1516 8. Determine that on the basis of the evidence submitted by Walt Disney Parks and Resorts U.S., Inc., that the property owner has complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of First Amended and Restated Development Agreement No. 96-01 for the 2025-2026 review period for The Disneyland Resort Project located in The Anaheim Resort. D180 9• Waive the sealed bid requirement of Council Policy 4.0 and approve an increase to the current master agreement with OCR Aviation, in the amount of $30,000 increasing the agreement from $50,000 to $80,000, for as needed airplane engine and airframe parts, components and labor for the Police Air Support Division. D180 10. Accept the bid from LC Action Police Supplies, in the amount of $220,700 plus applicable tax, for the purchase of rifles and associated parts for the Anaheim Police Department; and authorize the Purchasing Agent to issue Purchase Order No. 309-408629, in accordance with Invitation for Bid No. 9896. D180 11. Approve Purchase Order No. 515-408647 with Fujitec America, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $225,145.27 plus a 15% contingency, for the purchase and installation of replacement step chains for Escalators 7 and 8 at the Anaheim Convention Center; and authorize the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to execute all necessary contractual documents, in accordance with Axia Cooperative Contract No. 37457 City Council Minutes of June 23, 2026 Page 31 of 49 AGR-16034 12. Approve Contract No.MA 106-499159 with R.J. Noble Company for the purchase of asphalt concrete and other paving materials for the Public Works Department, in the amount of $2,387,461 for an initial one-year term, with up to four optional one year renewals, for a cumulative amount of $11,937,305 plus applicable sales tax, quarterly indexed price adjustments based on the California Statewide Crude Oil Price Index and Consumer Price Index increases for non -indexed items/fees applicable to renewals, and a 15% contingency; and authorize the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to execute all contractual documents and to exercise the renewal options, in accordance with Invitation for Bid No. 9884. 13. Approve Amendment No. 3 to Cooperative Agreement No. MA-080-19010444 with the County AGR-11151.3 of Orange for the Brookhurst Street Widening, Phase 2 Project, to update the Boundary Adjustment and Maintenance responsibilities of the Project area following completion of the Project; and authorize the Director of Public Works, or designee, to execute the amendment and any related documents and to take the necessary actions to implement and administer the agreement. AGR-16035 14. Approve the Service Agreement with Contemporary Services Corporation to provide contract Event Crowd Control services at the Anaheim Convention Center (ACC) to supplement the Convention Center's existing labor force, in an amount not -to -exceed $350,000 per contract year, for a three year term with two additional one-year renewal terms (cumulative contract amount not -to -exceed $1,750,000, with a majority of the costs being reimbursed by the tenants or promoters of the ACC and with the City's cost not to exceed $15,000 per contract year); authorize the Executive Director of the Convention, Sports & Entertainment Department to execute the agreement and any other related documents, including all actions necessary to implement and administer the Agreement; and approve additional expenditures not to exceed 20% of the contract amount for extra work not included in the Scope of Work. AGR-16036 15. Approve an Agreement with Emergency Ambulance Service, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $412,500, to provide on -call surge ambulance services to Anaheim Fire & Rescue for a five year term; and authorize the Fire Chief, or designees, to execute the agreement and related documents, including any cost -neutral amendments and to take the necessary actions to implement, fund, and administer the agreement. AGR-1666.0 19• RESOLUTION NO. 2026-066 . A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM approving a Cooperative Fire Protection Agreement with the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, and authorizing the Anaheim Fire Chief to execute the operating plan and any other documents required in connection with that agreement. Authorize the Interim City Manager to execute the Cooperative Fire Programs Local Responsibility Area Wildland Protection Reimbursement Agreement (Agreement No. 3CA07795) with the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, in an amount not to exceed $202,660.10, for wildland fire protection for the term of July 1, 2026 to June 30, 2027. City Council Minutes of June 23, 2026 Page 32 of 49 D159 20. Withdrawn by Staff- RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM authorizing the application to and participation in the Prohousing Designation Program through the California Department of Housing and Community Development [includes determination that the action is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Section 15378(b)(5) of the CEQA Guidelines because it consists solely of an administrative action of the collection of information for the City's authorization to submit an application to the State of California requesting a Prohousing Designation and will not result in any direct or indirect physical changes to the environment] (continued from the Council meeting of June 9, 2026, Agenda Item No. 17). Item No. 20 was withdrawn by staff. D154.7 21 RESOLUTION NO 2026-067 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM adopting a Memorandum of Understanding establishing terms and conditions of employment for employees represented by Teamsters, Local 952 [effective March 2, 2026 through March 3, 2029]. D114 22. Approve minutes of the City Council meeting of April 7, 2026. BUSINESS CALENDAR: 0144.6 7. Approve response to the 2025-2026 Orange County Grand Jury Report entitled "Connecting Orange County to LAX: Evaluating Transportation Options," and authorize the Interim City Manager to execute a letter and forward the response to the Presiding Judge of the Orange County Superior Court and the Orange County Grand Jury, pursuant to California Penal Code Section 933(c). DISCUSSION: Mayor Pro Tern Leon requested a clerical update to the response letter. In response to Council Member Balius, Director of Public Works Rudy Emami stated that Anaheim supports improved regional transit connectivity between Orange County and Los Angeles County, including the potential benefits of the Southeast Gateway Line. He explained that the project was not addressed in the City's formal response to the Grand Jury report because it is an LA Metro project located entirely within Los Angeles County, and the report made no findings or recommendations involving Anaheim. He emphasized Anaheim's interest in developing a seamless regional transit network connecting Orange County with destinations throughout Southern California. He cited Metrolink improvements, the Link Union Station program, Anaheim AeroLink, and potential future connections to LAX as complementary efforts, and said Anaheim intends to work with OCTA and other regional agencies to improve transit connections to LAX. MOTION: Council Member Balius moved to approve response to the 2025-2026 Orange County Grand Jury Report entitled "Connecting Orange County to LAX: Evaluating Transportation Options," and authorize the Interim City Manager to execute a letter and forward the response to the Presiding Judge of the Orange County Superior Court and the Orange County Grand Jury, pursuant to California Penal Code Section 933(c), seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Leon. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES — 7 (Mayor Aitken and Council Members Leon, Balius, Rubalcava, Kurtz, Maahs, and Meeks); NOES — 0. Motion carried. City Council Minutes of June 23, 2026 Page 33 of 49 AGR-11285.616. Approve the Sixth Amendment to the Agreement Regarding Homeless Shelter with The Salvation Army (TSA) for the continuation of shelter services, extending the term of the agreement for two years from July 1, 2026 to June 30, 2028 with an additional one-year option to expire on June 30, 2029; increase the maximum contract to an amount not to exceed $74,204,000, which includes additional authority of $25,400,000 to reimburse TSA for services rendered from July 1, 2026, to June 30, 2029; and authorize the City Manager, or designee, to execute the Amendment, and to execute subsequent amendments or documents necessary for the continuation or administration of shelter services at 1455 S. Salvation Place provided they are approved by the City Attorney's Office and do not increase the total maximum reimbursement amount payable to TSA. Director of Housing and Community Development Grace Ruiz-Stepter reported that if approved, the item would extend the term of the Agreement with The Salvation Army for an additional two years to June 30, 2028 with a one-year optional extension and increase the maximum contract amount to $74,200,000. She added that the action would include authority to reimburse The Salvation Army $25 million for services rendered from the period of July 1, 2026 through June 30, 2029. She stated that Anaheim Emergency Shelter is a critical part of Anaheim's homeless system of care, providing a bridge between street outreach and permanent housing. She noted that since opening in 2019, The Salvation Army has been a valued partner to the City, helping individuals experiencing homelessness access shelter services and pathways to housing. She explained that the proposed extension allows the City to continue the partnership and maintain a coordinated response that supports both individuals in need and the broader community. Director Ruiz-Stepter stated that since opening in 2019, the Anaheim Emergency Shelter has provided far more than a safe place to stay. She reported that the shelter has served nearly 1,900 individuals and provided more than 690,000 nights of lodging and over half a million meals through intensive case management and coordinated services. She noted that hundreds of individuals have secured employment and transitioned to permanent housing. She explained that the outcomes reflect the important role the shelter plays in the Anaheim homeless system of care, helping individuals move from crisis towards stability and self-sufficiency. Director Ruiz-Stepter reported that the Anaheim Emergency Shelter operates through a coordinated referral process system and is not a walk-in facility. She added that on average approximately two individuals enter the shelter each day through referrals from street outreach teams, law enforcement, and other community partners. She noted that because the shelter is funded by the City, admissions priority is given to individuals with established ties to Anaheim, helping ensure resources primarily benefit Anaheim residents and those connected to the community. She provided data for the shelter for the last three years. She explained that the numbers illustrate both the demand for shelter and the complexity of the population being served. She reported that the shelter remained more than 95% occupied during that time, serving over 1,600 individuals during the reporting period. She stated that many guests entered the shelter after experiencing homelessness for a year or more, and a significant number had been homeless for more than two years. She noted that despite those challenges, nearly 280 individuals were able to move from shelter into permanent housing. Director Ruiz-Stepter shared that the Anaheim Emergency Shelter is much more than a place to sleep. She explained that The Salvation Army provides substantive case management, housing navigation, workforce support, and a range of supportive services designed to help individuals regain stability during the three-year reporting period. She reported that the Anaheim Emergency Shelter staff conducted more than 8,000 case management sessions. She noted that the services are what transform the shelter from a temporary refuge into a pathway to long-term stability. She explained that while the emergency shelter provides immediate safety and stability, the immediate goal is reintegration into the community and permanent housing. She reported that in the past year, 84 City Council Minutes of June 23, 2026 Page 34 of 49 shelter guests have moved into permanent housing, including 41 residents who have moved into the recently completed Azure Apartments. She referenced a previous public commenter who is an example of how shelter case management, employment support, and housing navigation can work together to help someone move from homelessness back into stable housing and community life. She explained that his story is one that demonstrates the impact of the program. Director Ruiz-Stepter noted that when the shelter was established, the vision extended beyond emergency shelter beds to a comprehensive campus that could support individuals on a pathway from homelessness to community reintegration. She reported that today, the campus includes 72 permanent supportive housing apartments and most recently, the groundbreaking of the Center for Applied Research and Innovation (CART). She added that The Salvation Army continues to implement a robust good neighbor policy that includes 24-hour security, neighborhood outreach, and coordination with City staff and public safety partners. She announced that as a result of those efforts, calls for services in and around the campus have declined by 34% since July 2025. She stated that the groundbreaking of CARI represents the next phase of investment in the Emergency Shelter. She noted that while the Emergency Shelter provides immediate safety and stability, CARI would expand the services available to help guests successfully transition back into the community. She added that more than 75% of the building would be dedicated to guest services, such as case management and health services. Director Ruiz-Stepter reported that the proposed Sixth Amendment reflects the evolution of Anaheim's homeless system of care and represents the first reduction in General Fund support for the Anaheim Emergency Shelter since the facility opened in 2019. She stated that the need for emergency shelter remains significant; however, several factors support a gradual reduction in funding over the proposed three-year term. She added that since February 2026, the average shelter occupancy has stabilized at approximately 275 guests per night below historic peak utilization levels. She noted that at the same time, Anaheim has expanded permanent supportive housing opportunities, including the Azure Apartments, and created additional pathways from shelters to transition into housing and reduce pressure on shelter capacity. She added that the proposed amendment recognizes ongoing efforts to improve the effectiveness of the shelter system. She reported that the City and The Salvation Army are exploring expanded stabilization, recovery, and substance abuse treatment services that may help individuals address barriers to housing more quickly and reduce the length of time spent in the shelter. She stated that staff are recommending a phase reduction of funding from $9.2 million in year one to $8.5 million in year two and $7.7 million in year three. She explained that the approach preserves Anaheim's Emergency Shelter capacity while aligning resources with current utilization trends, expanding housing opportunities, and a service model increasingly focusing on housing outcomes and long-term stability. Director Ruiz-Stepter recognized that the Anaheim Emergency Shelter has become much more than a shelter. She explained that it serves as a critical gateway to housing services, employment, and long-term stability for individuals seeking to exit homelessness. She noted that the proposed amendment allows the City to continue the important partnership while responsibly reducing General Fund support. DISCUSSION: Mayor Pro Tern Leon inquired whether the two-year contract term and potential extension were intended to allow the City to evaluate the expanded stabilization, recovery, and substance -use treatment services before committing to a longer -term arrangement. Director Ruiz-Stepter stated that the City regularly meets with the Salvation Army to evaluate shelter residents and discuss the potential transition toward more substance -use treatment beds. She reported that CARI would provide additional information on ways to shorten shelter stays, while expanded affordable housing and other efforts are also contributing to a decline in the shelter City Council Minutes of June 23, 2026 Page 35 of 49 population. She acknowledged that Anaheim will likely always need some level of emergency shelter but said the City is trending toward a point where it may be possible to reduce, though not eliminate, shelter capacity. Mayor Pro Tem Leon expressed support for the item and appreciation for the work of The Salvation Army and City staff. He noted that the City is setting the standard for different partnerships and addressing concerns within the City. He noted that the presentation is beneficial for the public in response to homelessness within the City. He highlighted the improvements in the City's response to homelessness throughout the City and positive responses from the community to the City's work. MOTION: Mayor Pro Tern Leon moved to approve the Sixth Amendment to the Agreement Regarding Homeless Shelter with The Salvation Army (TSA) for the continuation of shelter services, extending the term of the agreement for two years from July 1, 2026 to June 30, 2028 with an additional one- year option to expire on June 30, 2029; increase the maximum contract to an amount not to exceed $74,204,000, which includes additional authority of $25,400,000 to reimburse TSA for services rendered from July 1, 2026, to June 30, 2029; and authorize the City Manager, or designee, to execute the Amendment, and to execute subsequent amendments or documents necessary for the continuation or administration of shelter services at 1455 S. Salvation Place provided they are approved by the City Attorney's Office and do not increase the total maximum reimbursement amount payable to TSA. DISCUSSION: Council Member Maahs acknowledged Deputy Director of Housing and Community Development Sandra Lozeau, who helped her assist someone to enter The Salvation Army. She explained that the individual did not have the proper documentation due to their Anaheim connection; however, Deputy Director Lozeau was able to assist. She inquired about the status of a direct line for individuals seeking assistance. Director Ruiz-Stepter thanked Council Member Maahs for the recognition of Deputy Director Lozeau and her management of the City's homeless system of care. She stated that the staff is working closely with the Anaheim Police Department on a central dispatch system and expects it to be available in the fall, around September or October. She added that the groundwork for the system is already underway. Council Member Maahs shared the success story of an individual who overcame challenges with alcohol and drug use, entered the shelter program, and ultimately regained his sense of purpose, self-respect, and independence. She stated that he now works for one of Anaheim's largest employers and recently returned from a work trip to Ireland. She emphasized that there is always hope and thanked staff for their work in changing lives. MOTION: Mayor Pro Tenn Leon moved to approve the Sixth Amendment to the Agreement Regarding Homeless Shelter with The Salvation Army (TSA) for the continuation of shelter services, extending the term of the agreement for two years from July 1, 2026 to June 30, 2028 with an additional one- year option to expire on June 30, 2029; increase the maximum contract to an amount not to exceed $74,204,000, which includes additional authority of $25,400,000 to reimburse TSA for services rendered from July 1, 2026, to June 30, 2029; and authorize the City Manager, or designee, to execute the Amendment, and to execute subsequent amendments or documents necessary for the continuation or administration of shelter services at 1455 S. Salvation Place provided they are approved by the City Attorney's Office and do not increase the total maximum reimbursement amount payable to TSA, seconded by Council Member Maahs. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES — 7 (Mayor Aitken and Council Members Leon, Balius, Rubalcava, Kurtz, Maahs, and Meeks); NOES — 0. Motion carried. City Council Minutes of June 23, 2026 Page 36 of 49 AGR-11404.517. Approve the Fifth Amendment to Agreement with Lyons Security Service, Inc. for Emergency Shelter Security at The Salvation Army (TSA) Anaheim Emergency Shelter (AES) located at 1455 S. Salvation Place and surrounding area extending the term of the Agreement by two years from July 1, 2026 to June 30, 2028 with an additional one-year option; increase the maximum contract authority by $5,112,815.68; authorize the Housing and Community Development Director, or designee, to execute the Amendment, as well as any subsequent amendments or documents necessary for the continuation or clarification of security services at TSA AES and surrounding area, provided they are approved by the City Attorney's Office and do not increase the maximum contract authority payable to Lyons Security. DISCUSSION: Council Member Balius questioned why the contract had not undergone a competitive bid process, noting that the question was raised the year prior. Director Ruiz-Stepter explained that the City inherited the contract, which was established alongside the shelter's security contract. She acknowledged the issue had been raised the previous year but said the contract was not put out for an RFP because the Council had not specifically directed staff to do so. She indicated that if the Council wants the contract competitively bid, they can proceed in that direction. In response to Council Member Balius, Interim City Manager Garcia stated that the current contract is for three years but allows the City to terminate without cause. He identified two options: begin an RFP process now or wait for the citywide security RFP planned for next year and potentially combine the contracts to achieve economies of scale. He agreed that the contract should be reviewed given the length of time since it was last competitively evaluated. Council Member Balius supported combining the contract with the upcoming Citywide Security Services Request for Proposal (RFP) and inquired whether the current item needed to be placed on a future agenda. Interim City Manager Garcia explained that the Council can include the request with approval of the item. Council Member Balius expressed his support to include the request to include the services with the Citywide RFP along with approval of the item. MOTION: Council Member Balius moved to approve the Fifth Amendment to Agreement with Lyons Security Service, Inc. for Emergency Shelter Security at The Salvation Army (TSA) Anaheim Emergency Shelter (AES) located at 1455 S. Salvation Place and surrounding area extending the term of the Agreement by two years from July 1, 2026 to June 30, 2028 with an additional one-year option; increase the maximum contract authority by $5,112,815.68; authorize the Housing and Community Development Director, or designee, to execute the Amendment, as well as any subsequent amendments or documents necessary for the continuation or clarification of security services at TSA AES and surrounding area, provided they are approved by the City Attorney's Office and do not increase the maximum contract authority payable to Lyons Security, including direction that the agreement be included as part of the Citywide Security Services Request for Proposals (RFP) when it is released, seconded by Council Member Kurtz. DISCUSSION: City Attorney Fabela clarified that the motion includes approval of the staff recommendation with direction to begin the RFP process within the next year concurrent with the Citywide contract. City Council Minutes of June 23, 2026 Page 37 of 49 Interim City Manager Garcia noted that the Citywide contract expires in 2028, with the RFP process beginning in 2027. In response to Mayor Aitken, Director Ruiz-Stepter clarified that the contract term is two years with an optional renewal. Interim City Manager Garcia explained that if the contract was approved, the optional renewal may not be needed if the services are included with the Citywide RFP. He noted that Lyons has been a strong partner and done an excellent job mitigating impacts in the area. He explained that the recommendation reflects the City's commitment to protecting the surrounding community and businesses. Council Member Balius stated that the contract appeared reasonable but emphasized that certain contracts should be competitively bid approximately every five years, and the contract was one that should undergo that process. MOTION: Council Member Balius moved to approve the Fifth Amendment to Agreement with Lyons Security Service, Inc. for Emergency Shelter Security at The Salvation Army (TSA) Anaheim Emergency Shelter (AES) located at 1455 S. Salvation Place and surrounding area extending the term of the Agreement by two years from July 1, 2026 to June 30, 2028 with an additional one-year option; increase the maximum contract authority by $5,112,815.68; authorize the Housing and Community Development Director, or designee, to execute the Amendment, as well as any subsequent amendments or documents necessary for the continuation or clarification of security services at TSA AES and surrounding area, provided they are approved by the City Attorney's Office and do not increase the maximum contract authority payable to Lyons Security, including direction that the agreement be included as part of the Citywide Security Services Request for Proposals (RFP) when it is released, seconded by Council Member Kurtz. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES — 7 (Mayor Aitken and Council Members Leon, Balius, Rubalcava, Kurtz, Maahs, and Meeks); NOES — 0. Motion carried. AGR-16037 18. Approve the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the County of Orange and the City of Garden Grove for School Mobile Assessment Resource Team (SMART); accept funding, in the amount of $305,732, under the Juvenile Justice Crime Prevention Act; and authorize the Chief of Police, or designee, to execute the MOU and all required documents and take the necessary actions to implement required documents. Police Department Lieutenant Stephen Pena reported that the Juvenile Justice Crime Prevention Act has allocated funding for a program in Orange County known as the North School Mobile Assessment and Resource Team (SMART), which allows participation of multiple law enforcement agencies in the northern region of Orange County to combat threats of violence and violent crimes committed on, near, or impacting school campuses and communities. DISCUSSION: Council Member Rubalcava requested an example of a situation where the grant may have assisted. Lieutenant Pena explained that the SMART team responds to and investigates threats against schools, including threats received through social media or campus rumors. He noted that investigators are available 24/7 and may remain involved for multiple days until a threat is fully resolved. City Council Minutes of June 23, 2026 Page 38 of 49 In response to Council Member Rubalcava, Lieutenant Pena confirmed that the SMART team has responded to several swatting incidents throughout the school year, including one that occurred that day. He added that investigators coordinate with multiple jurisdictions, including federal authorities, to identify and track down swatting callers, who are often located out of state. Council Member Rubalcava requested clarification on whether the funds were related to a grant and if the program intends to harm or inflict negativity upon the students in the City. Lieutenant Pena confirmed that the program was not intended to harm or inflict negativity upon the students in the City. Council Member Rubalcava highlighted the SMART team's role in enhancing school safety and asked staff to describe Anaheim PD's youth engagement initiatives. She emphasized the Department's commitment to protecting and serving youth and noted their participation in community events throughout Anaheim, including on Pauline Street, Glen Neighbors, and Balsam. Lieutenant Pena explained that the Anaheim Police Department (PD) has nine school resource officers serving 15 high school and junior high campuses, where officers engage with students during school activities and provide presentations on issues such as a -bikes and vaping. He added that the Department also has a Youth Engagement Team, led by Youth Engagement Specialist Carmela Mendoza, which partners with schools, nonprofits, and city departments to connect officers with youth in neighborhoods and at community events. He highlighted programs such as Fun on Wheels, as well as partnerships with Neutral Ground, Project Youth, and Orange County Probation on diversion and crime -prevention efforts. He noted that the goal is to intervene early and address underlying issues before youth become involved in crime. Council Member Rubalcava praised Anaheim PD's youth engagement efforts, particularly its partnerships with organizations such as Neutral Ground amid increased gang activity in the district. She shared an example of a 14-year-old father in continuation school who has had prior law - enforcement contact and has benefited from positive interactions with APD officers through the Fun on Wheels program. She emphasized the importance of early, positive intervention to prevent at -risk youth from joining gangs or otherwise going off track, and highlighted APD's investment in community outreach and its increasingly diverse, representative police force. MOTION: Council Member Rubalcava moved to approve the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the County of Orange and the City of Garden Grove for School Mobile Assessment Resource Team (SMART); accept funding, in the amount of $305,732, under the Juvenile Justice Crime Prevention Act; and authorize the Chief of Police, or designee, to execute the MOU and all required documents and take the necessary actions to implement required documents. DISCUSSION: Council Member Maahs acknowledged the SMART team for preventing a potential school shooting during the past year, noting that law enforcement often receives little recognition for incidents they successfully prevent. She thanked the SMART team, School Resource Officers, and Carmela Mendoza for their work and emphasized the importance of building strong connections with youth early on. Chief of Police Manuel Cid added that, given the influence of social media on youth, the SMART team and Lieutenant Pena's group proactively monitor and vet concerning information shared online. He explained that their efforts are intended to identify potential threats early and prevent incidents before they occur. City Council Minutes of June 23, 2026 Page 39 of 49 Council Member Rubalcava thanked APD for participating in the City's mental health and wellness initiatives and school resource drives, emphasizing the importance of addressing bullying and supporting youth mental health. She expressed interest in strengthening anti -bullying initiatives through greater collaboration between the City and local schools. MOTION: Council Member Rubalcava moved to approve the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the County of Orange and the City of Garden Grove for School Mobile Assessment Resource Team (SMART); accept funding, in the amount of $305,732, under the Juvenile Justice Crime Prevention Act; and authorize the Chief of Police, or designee, to execute the MOU and all required documents and take the necessary actions to implement required documents, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Leon. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES — 7 (Mayor Aitken and Council Members Leon, Balius, Rubalcava, Kurtz, Maahs, and Meeks); NOES — 0. Motion carried. B105 23. Consider appointments to fill two (2) scheduled vacancies, terms ending June 30, 2030, on the Library Board. Library Board: APPOINTMENT: Billie Joe Wright (term ending June 30, 2030) APPOINTMENT: Jessica Chesebro (term ending June 30, 2030) NOMINATION: Council Member Maahs nominated Billie Joe Wright and Council Member Meeks nominated Jessica Chesebro. DISCUSSION: Council Member Rubalcava expressed support for the nomination of District 3 resident, Billie Joe Wright. NOMINATION: Council Member Maahs nominated Billie Joe Wright and Council Member Meeks nominated Jessica Chesebro. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES — 7 (Mayor Aitken and Council Members Leon, Balius, Rubalcava, Kurtz, Maahs, and Meeks); NOES — 0. Nominations approved. City Clerk Theresa Bass confirmed that the appointees would be contacted by the City Clerk's Office, provided the Boards and Commission handbook, and connected with the Board's liaison. She added that as part of the application process, staff notifies the applicants that they would be included on the nomination list. PUBLIC HEARING: 24. Public hearing to consider the Fiscal Year 2026/27 Budget and budget appropriations limits for D106 the City and its Community Facilities Districts, and changes in various fee schedules. T105 A. RESOLUTION NO. 2026-068 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM adopting the Fiscal Year 2026/27 Budget. City Council Minutes of June 23, 2026 Page 40 of 49 B. RESOLUTION NO. 2026-069 _ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA, adopting the annual appropriations limit for the Fiscal Year 2026/27. RESOLUTION NO. 2026-070 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA, adopting the Community Facilities District No. 06-2 (Stadium Lofts) annual appropriations limit for the Fiscal Year 2026/27. RESOLUTION NO. 2026-071 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA, adopting the Community Facilities District No. 08-1 (Platinum Triangle) annual appropriations limit for the Fiscal Year 2026/27. C. RESOLUTION NO. 2026-072 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM adopting a schedule of fees for services rendered by the Office of the City Clerk [includes determination that the action is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Section 21080(b)(8) of the Public Resources Code]. D. RESOLUTION NO. 2026-073_ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM establishing fees to be charged for Community Services Department programs and services [includes determination that the action is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Section 21080(b)(8) of the Public Resources Code]. E. RESOLUTION NO. 2026-074 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM amending the schedule of rates, fees and charges for rental of space, parking and for certain labor, equipment and services at the Anaheim Convention Center effective July 1, 2026 [includes determination that the action is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act, pursuant to Section 21080(b)(8) of the Public Resources Code and California Code of Regulations Section 15273]. F RESOLUTION NO. _2_026-075 __ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM establishing paramedic fees in connection with emergency medical services to be charged by the Fire and Rescue Department of the City of Anaheim and rescinding Resolution No. 2025-057 [includes determination that the action is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Section 21080(b)(8) of the Public Resources Code]. RESOLUTION NO. 2026-076 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM establishing Life Safety Division fees to be charged by the Fire and Rescue Department of the City of Anaheim and rescinding Resolution No. 2025-056 [includes determination that the action is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Section 21080(b)(8) of the Public Resources Code]. City Council Minutes of June 23, 2026 Page 41 of 49 RESOLUTION NO. 2026-077_ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM relating to fees and penalties in connection with implementing the Unified Hazardous Waste and Hazardous Material Management Regulatory Program Act and rescinding Resolution No. 2025-058 [includes determination that the action is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Section 21080(b)(8) of the Public Resources Code and California Code of Regulations Section 152731. G. RESOLUTION NO. 2026-078 _ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM adopting a new schedule of fees, charges and rates for building, construction, and National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits, services and activities [includes determination that the action is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Section 21080(b)(8) of the California Public Resources Code]. RESOLUTION NO. 2026-079 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM amending and restating fee and rate schedules for the Community Preservation & Licensing Division of the City of Anaheim [includes determination that the action is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Section 21080(b)(8) of the California Public Resources Code]. RESOLUTION NO. 2026..-080 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM amending and restating fee and rate schedules for planning, zoning, and environmental petitions, applications, permits, approvals, appeals and inspections [includes determination that the action is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Section 21080(b)(8) of the California Public Resources Code]. H. RESOLUTION NO. 2026-081 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM amending the schedule of fees to be charged for certain services provided by the Anaheim Police Department. I. RESOLUTION NO. _ 2026-082 _ _ _ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM adopting a schedule of fines for false alarms pursuant to Section 4.95.120 of Title 4 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. J. RESOLUTION NO. _ 2026-083 __ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM adopting new fee schedules for the Public Works Department of the City of Anaheim. K. RESOLUTION NO. 2026-084 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM adopting a revised schedule of sanitation fees for wastewater and solid waste and rescinding Resolution Number 2025-063 and determining such actions are exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080(b)(8) and Guideline Section 15273 (a). City Council Minutes of June 23, 2026 Page 42 of 49 L. Withdrawn by Staff- RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM amending the Sewer Impact and Improvement Fees for the Central Area of the City of Anaheim and determining such actions are exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080(b)(8) and Guideline Section 15273 (a). Item No. 24-L was withdrawn by staff. Interim City Manager Garcia introduced the public hearing on the proposed FY 2026/27 City budget, fee changes, and budget appropriations limits, noting that the process included two budget workshops, six neighborhood meetings, and extensive staff preparation. He stated that the proposed budget includes a structural General Fund gap of more than $42 million, which would be addressed through remaining Hilton parking structure sale proceeds and a draw on General Fund reserves. He noted that the forecast does not account for expiring labor agreements, potential additional costs, or an economic contraction. He explained that the planned retirement of the LPMR bonds near the end of the fiscal year is expected to return more than $120 million in annual revenue to the General Fund. He stated that approximately half could address the existing structural deficit, while the remainder could support enhanced services, reserve replenishment, community improvements, and debt repayment. He emphasized the need for fiscal restraint and said a future strategic -plan workshop would help establish priorities and funding considerations for a balanced and sustainable budget. Director of Finance Deborah Moreno presented the proposed FY 2026/27 budget, totaling approximately $2.6 billion in Citywide expenditures. She added that Enterprise funds account for 38% of the budget from restricted sources, while the General Fund represents 22% and contains most unrestricted funding. She reported the Five -Year General Fund forecast projects an operating deficit of approximately $42.3 million, increasing to nearly $45 million after recently approved adjustments, including the proposed labor agreement with the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) and $500,000 for improvements at the West Anaheim police substation. She stated that the deficit would be addressed through one-time funding, including remaining Hilton parking structure sale proceeds, reserves, and the anticipated spring 2027 payoff of LPMR bonds. She noted that General Fund reserves are estimated at about 11% of expenditures, within current policy levels. Director Moreno emphasized that, while the City is approaching a stronger financial position following the bond payoff, continued attention is needed to responsibly prioritize reserves, debt repayment, service enhancements, and capital improvements. She reported that the proposed budget also includes annual appropriations limits for the City and two Community Facilities Districts, along with fee changes. She noted that the appropriations for Community Facilities Districts are required under the California Constitution and are calculated using the prior year's limit, adjusted for factors including City population growth and California per -capita personal income growth. Director Moreno presented proposed changes to City fees. She reported that proposed increases for General Fund user fees are approximately 3%, covering services provided by Community Services, Fire and Rescue, Planning and Building, Public Works, Police, and the City Clerk. Staff said market conditions or comparable fees could justify adjustments above or below 3%. She noted that Anaheim Convention Center fees are structured around the goal of recovering operating expenses, including overhead, through charges to facility users. She added that rates are intended to be fair and equitable and generally consistent with comparable convention venues. She reported that Public Works is proposing a 5% increase in solid waste collection fees to address increasing operating costs and contractual payments to the City's waste hauler and the county landfill system. She added that a 5% increase for wastewater collection and disposal services are proposed to help cover operating City Council Minutes of June 23, 2026 Page 43 of 49 and maintenance costs, regulatory compliance requirements, and ongoing debt -service obligations. DISCUSSION: Mayor Aitken noted that Item 24-L was withdrawn by staff. In response to Mayor Pro Tern Leon, Director Moreno clarified that the majority of the budget adjustment reflects Citywide costs associated with the recently approved AFSCME agreement, which was approved June 9 and therefore was not included in the original proposed budget. She added that the remaining $500,000 is designated for improvements to the West Anaheim Police Substation. Council Member Rubalcava requested clarification on why the proposed budget and timelines for the Wildland Hand Crew Program and Fire Station 13 had not been adjusted following questions raised at the June 9t" budget workshop. She expressed concern that the timelines appeared longer than previously discussed, particularly for the hand crew program. She suggested beginning recruitment and training of full-time technicians sooner, rather than waiting until FY 2027/28, and asked Chief Russell to explain the rationale behind the proposed timeline. Director Moreno explained that the Wildland Hand Crew Program timeline is primarily driven by staffing and recruitment needs, including hiring a new captain and allowing time to evaluate the program before recruiting additional personnel. She stated that there would not be an immediate cost associated with the delayed timeline, but if recruitment and implementation can be accelerated, the City would return to Council with a budget adjustment to move the program forward sooner. Council Member Rubalcava expressed concern that the Wildland Hand Crew Program was not scheduled to begin until FY 2027/28. She urged staff to move the timeline forward to FY 2026/27 to begin planning, preparation, and recruitment. Interim City Manager Garcia explained that the Wildland Hand Crew Program timeline was developed by the Fire Department and that the City supported moving forward with the concept. He stated that the original schedule contemplated using some funding during the current fiscal year to begin preparatory work, with additional positions added sooner if the department could accelerate implementation. He noted that some planning and program development needed to occur first and deferred to Chief Russell f to explain the timeline in greater detail. In response to Council Member Rubalcava, Fire Chief Patrick Russell explained that the Wildland Hand Crew Program is expected to begin with a captain position around mid -year, who will handle recruitment, HR processes, hourly wage setup, and other program preparations. He noted that the Department plans to initially hire 10 hand crew technicians, provide training, and deploy them for weed -abatement work. He reported that an additional 10 members could be added later as the program develops. He stated that the long-term goal is for the crew to become fire -suppression trained and qualified, allowing them to assist Anaheim during fires and potentially support neighboring agencies on a cost -recovery basis. He added that the Department also plans to begin ordering vehicles in July, with temporary vehicle options available while the appropriate equipment is being procured. He emphasized that implementation will depend largely on how quickly recruitment, training, equipment, and other preparations can be completed. Council Member Rubalcava inquired why the hand crew positions were scheduled for FY 2027/28, expressing concern that waiting could mean missing two fire seasons before the City has personnel available for fire prevention. She asked whether the program could be implemented sooner and whether the 10 positions should instead be added to the FY 2026/27 budget, emphasizing the value of investing in the hand crew as soon as possible. Chief Russell stated that the Department would prefer to reach full staffing as quickly as funding City Council Minutes of June 23, 2026 Page 44 of 49 allows. He noted that the first priority is hiring and training 10 crew members to begin weed abatement, which would have a significant impact. He explained that expanding the crew to 20 members would increase its capacity and allow it to function as a fire -suppression unit to assist with Anaheim fires. In response to Council Member Rubalcava, Chief Russell explained that the City could potentially hire all 20 hand crew members by mid -year of FY 2026/27, provided funding is available and it is determined to be appropriate. He reported that the Department is exploring ways to combine recruitment with its existing Ambulance Operator (AO) recruitment process, since some qualifications and requirements would be similar. He added that based on the strong applicant pool for the AO program, approximately 300 candidates, recruiting 20 hand crew members could be feasible rather than limiting the initial hiring to 10. Council Member Rubalcava requested that staff move the Wildland Hand Crew Program timeline into FY 2026/27, specifically to add the 10 positions to the current budget. She explained that the estimated $973,000 cost was justified because the program could begin providing wildfire prevention and weed abatement services sooner, and noted that the program was expected to eventually become cost -neutral. She raised concerns about the timeline for the Fire Station 13 project in District 3. She stated that the City had already acquired the property for approximately $1.4 million, but the proposed schedule appeared to delay significant site improvements or preparation for several years. She questioned why the timeline was so far out and asked the Chief Russell whether any work could begin during the current budget cycle so residents could see progress toward developing the property into a functioning fire station. Chief Russell explained that the next steps for Fire Station 13 would include funding architectural plans, surveying, soil testing, and other preliminary work. He reported that based on the timelines for Station 12 and the former relocation of Station 5, completing this work would take approximately eight months to one year. He stated that the next phase would depend on the City's funding priority for station construction, followed by funding and recruiting firefighters to staff the facility. He added that the Department would coordinate firefighter recruitment and the 12-week academy so personnel are ready when the station becomes operational. He noted that the City has already secured a place in the production line for a new fire apparatus, recognizing that fire equipment can take years to manufacture. He reported that the City would not be required to pay for the apparatus until delivery. The expected equipment timeline is approximately three years, although existing reserve apparatus could be used if the station moves forward sooner. In response to Council Member Rubalcava, Interim City Manager Garcia stated that he would meet with Chief Russell to reassess the timeline for Fire Station 13. He noted that the upcoming strategic - plan discussions would address the station as a priority project, including its timing and financing. He committed to developing a more specific schedule and identifying preliminary work that could potentially be completed during the current fiscal year, then bringing the project forward as part of the Strategic Plan discussion. Council Member Rubalcava advocated for starting Fire Station 13 improvements sooner rather than back -loading the entire project, suggesting that work could be completed incrementally and costs spread over time. She noted that the City has not yet determined how the future LPMR bond revenue will ultimately be allocated and argued that, given the uncertainty, it would be preferable to begin necessary work as soon as possible rather than delay the project. Council Member Kurtz supported moving forward with the Wildland Hand Crew Program without unnecessary delays but emphasized the importance of developing it properly. She asked staff to consider the time needed to hire a captain, develop the crew's responsibilities and operational City Council Minutes of June 23, 2026 Page 45 of 49 guidelines, establish training requirements, and determine how the crew will be deployed. She recommended evaluating potential federal and State funding opportunities related to fire suppression. She asked that all of these factors be incorporated into the timeline discussion so the City establishes a comprehensive program rather than simply hiring personnel without a clear operational plan. Interim City Manager Garcia agreed to review the Wildland Hand Crew Program timeline and reiterated that if the department can develop the program faster than anticipated, staff will return to Council during the mid -year budget process to request funding for the positions and bring the crew onboard as soon as possible. At 8:22 p.m., Mayor Aitken opened the public hearing. Marc Herbert criticized the City Council for not addressing issues he previously raised during budget workshops and requested follow-up responses. He questioned Anaheim's progress toward its 9,100- unit state housing target, noting that only 367 units had been completed by the mid -year point. He also questioned why Anaheim received no funding through the State's California Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities program, which distributed approximately $4 billion over 10 years and leveraged additional funding for affordable housing. He raised concerns about City overtime, particularly police and fire staffing. He cited vacancies among police and fire dispatchers that had previously been covered through overtime and questioned whether those positions had since been filled. He also questioned the number of police officers attending City Council meetings, suggesting that overtime costs could be reduced by keeping officers on patrol rather than assigning them to Council meetings. He asked the Council to provide answers to these concerns at the hearing. A total of fifteen (15) public comments were received electronically related to Public Hearing Item No. 24. [A final total of twenty-one (21) public comments were received electronically, distributed to the City Council, and made part of the official records]. — See Appendix. At 8:26 p.m., Mayor Aitken closed the public hearing. Council Member Kurtz requested clarification on the proposed Public Works fee increases, noting that Council Members had received numerous emails from residents expressing concerns. She asked staff to explain the increases so residents would understand that the fees were intended to offset higher costs from the County and other external increases, rather than generate additional revenue for the City's General Fund. Director of Public Works Rudy Emami explained that the proposed 5% Public Works fee increase is primarily intended to offset higher costs imposed by the County and contractual increases from the City's waste hauler. He noted that the City is absorbing part of the County's new fees and is spreading the County's three-year increase over five years to lessen the impact on residents. He reported that the remaining increase reflects the contractually required Consumer Price Index (CPI) adjustment for the City's waste -hauling contractor. Council Member Kurtz thanked staff for clarifying that the Public Works fee increases are not discretionary increases imposed solely by the department but are largely intended to account for higher County fees and contractual cost increases. Council Member Meeks expressed support for implementing the wildfire hand crew as soon as possible, while acknowledging the time needed for hiring and program development. She suggested adding the program during the mid -year budget process to give the Fire Department an opportunity to accelerate implementation. She requested clarification on whether increasing the City's reserve policy City Council Minutes of June 23, 2026 Page 46 of 49 from 10% to 20-25% would require separate Council action or should instead be addressed as part of the upcoming Strategic Plan and financial -strategy discussions. Interim City Manager Garcia stated that the reserve policy will be addressed as part of the upcoming Strategic Plan discussion, including determining the appropriate reserve level, how the City would reach that target, and how quickly it should be achieved. He explained that the current reserve range of approximately 7% to 11 % is established by Council policy. He reported that increasing the target toward 20% would require Council to adopt a new resolution changing the existing policy. He stated that during the Strategic Plan discussion, staff would provide numbers and strategies for a reserve policy. In response to Mayor Aitken, Director Moreno reported that the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) recommends maintaining at least two months of operating reserves, or approximately 17%. She stated that because the City no longer has some reserves it has historically relied on, such as funds borrowed from its internal service fund, that 17% benchmark is particularly important. She noted that a recent ratings report from Fitch identified the City's reliance on the Resort area as a risk and indicated that reserves should be increased accordingly. She confirmed that 25% would be a safe level and not exorbitant. Council Member Balius thanked staff for their work preparing the annual budget and asked about the increase in the projected operating surplus, noting that it had risen from $42.3 million to $44.8 million over the previous few weeks. Director Moreno explained that the increase was due to adjustments from the AFSCME agreement and the West Anaheim Police Substation improvements. In response to Council Member Balius, Director Moreno stated that unanticipated expenses would be for labor contracts and direction based on Strategic Plan conversations. Council Member Balius expressed enthusiasm about the upcoming Strategic Plan updates and the opportunity to identify priorities for potential use of additional funding. He cautioned that the projected $58.8 million surplus may not materialize at that level and noted that even a reduced $40 million surplus may not go far when considering the City's strategic priorities. He emphasized the importance of remaining realistic about available funding. Mayor Aitken asked Director Moreno whether, if fiscal conditions allow, the City could responsibly increase Code Enforcement staffing and fill vacant Planning positions during the current budget year, potentially before the mid -year budget review. Director Moreno advised that the mid -year budget review would be the appropriate time. She recommended a bigger picture plan rather than individual actions. In response to Mayor Pro Tern Leon, Budget Supervisor D'Anne Lee explained that the appropriations limit is recalculated annually based on the prior year's limit, with adjustments for cost - of -living and population changes provided by the California Department of Finance. She reported that the appropriations limit traces back to its original establishment when a district is formed and is adjusted annually based on population changes and growth in personal income. She noted that the appropriations limit was reviewed annually by the City's external auditors. Mayor Pro Tern Leon thanked City staff for their work developing the budget and emphasized public safety as a core priority, highlighting investments in police and fire services and upgrades to the West Anaheim substation. He noted continued investments in housing, community services, infrastructure, City Council Minutes of June 23, 2026 Page 47 of 49 transportation, parks, and neighborhood improvements, including streetlights, undergrounding projects, storm -drain infrastructure, and the La Palma Storm Drain project. He emphasized neighborhood quality of life as a top priority and expressed support for services benefiting seniors, youth, working families, and residents experiencing homelessness. He expressed support for the budget and looked forward to future Strategic Plan discussions and opportunities to further improve services for Anaheim residents. Council Member Meeks thanked staff and noted that the City is fortunate to approve a budget that adds services while many other cities are making cuts. She credited financial investments and strategies implemented over the past 30 years for putting Anaheim in this position and emphasized the need to carefully invest current revenues while planning for long-term revenue growth. MOTION: Council Member Meeks moved to approve Resolution Nos. 2026-068 through 2026-084 identified in Item Nos. 24-A through 24-K, seconded by Mayor Pro Tern Leon. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES — 7 (Mayor Aitken and Council Members Leon, Balius, Rubalcava, Kurtz, Maahs, and Meeks); NOES — 0. Motion carried. T106 25. Public Hearing to consider a resolution confirming the diagram and assessment and providing for the levy of the annual assessment in and for The Anaheim Resort Maintenance District for Fiscal Year 2026/27. RESOLUTION NO. 2026-085 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM confirming the diagram and assessment and providing for the levy of the annual assessment in and for the Anaheim Resort Maintenance District. Director of Public Works Rudy Emami reported that the public hearing concerned the annual levy of assessments for the Anaheim Resort Maintenance District for FY 2026/27. He stated that the City Council initiated the levy proceedings on May 12, 2026, by accepting the assessment engineer's report and scheduling the public hearing. He explained that the Anaheim Resort Maintenance District was created to ensure the high level of care needed to maintain a distinctive and festive destination. Director Emami reported that the Anaheim Resort Maintenance District is approximately 2.2 square miles and was formed July 1, 1999 by the City Council, based upon a vote by the property owners in the Anaheim Resort. He stated that the assessment rate for FY 2026/27 was recommended to increase 4% in conformance with the allowable increase of 3% in the Consumer Price Index from January to January of the previous calendar year, plus a catch-up factor of 1 %, 98% of the maximum allowable rate. He explained that the assessment would generate $6.5 million to be deposited into the Anaheim Resort Maintenance District Fund. Director Emami stated that the District has dedicated Public Works staff to oversee the operations and maintenance contracts 24/7, 365 days a year. He stated that the Five -Year Resort Improvement Program addresses replacement needs of landscape and hardscape within the District. He shared that projects included in the next year's proposed budget are sidewalk replacement, updating landscape designs, replanting parkways, and continuing to update and replace existing irrigation to be more efficient and conserve water. At 8:47 p.m., Mayor Aitken opened the public hearing. City Council Minutes of June 23, 2026 Page 48 of 49 Marc Herbert raised concerns about the accuracy of the Anaheim Resort Maintenance District assessment methodology, particularly the use of average daily trips and front footage. He requested an audit and questioned how the Wyndham Hotel's additional, allegedly unauthorized rooms may have affected its assessments over the past 27 years. He also questioned how the additional rooms went undetected for so long, whether City departments properly communicated information about the property, and whether the assessment records have been corrected. He asked for greater transparency regarding the hotel's historical payments and how the issue was discovered, and expressed concern that limited public interaction may have contributed to the issue going unnoticed. City Clerk Theresa Bass reported that no electronic public comments were received related to Public Hearing Item No. 25. At 8:51 p.m., Mayor Aitken closed the public hearing. DISCUSSION: In response to Council Member Rubalcava, Director Emami confirmed that the levy was a self -assessment by the hoteliers in the Resort District for enhanced maintenance. He reported that the assessment is conducted annually following confirmation by the Engineer's Report. Council Member Rubalcava requested clarification on potential increases due to inflation. Director Emami explained that the assessment can be increased annually by CPI, but the City chose not to apply increases during the more difficult COVID years due to reduced visitation. He reported that a catch-up provision allows the City to recover those deferred increases when conditions improve. He noted that additional increases were applied over the past two years and that the current proposal includes another 1 % catch-up increase. In response to Council Member Rubalcava, Director Emami confirmed that the assessments are audited to verify frontages and other assessment information, particularly in light of changes associated with the Disneyland Forward project. He noted that the review goes beyond the annual assessment Engineer's Report. Council Member Rubalcava emphasized that the assessment revenues are public funds and should be subject to auditing and transparency. She noted that the funds are placed in a dedicated fund and can only be used for purposes benefiting the participating hoteliers and maintaining the Resort area, rather than being redirected to the General Fund or unrelated priorities such as affordable housing. Director Emami confirmed that the assessments are public funds and any other uses would require a new vote by the assessed properties. MOTION: Council Member Meeks moved to approve RESOLUTION NO. 2026-085_ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM confirming the diagram and assessment and providing for the levy of the annual assessment in and for the Anaheim Resort Maintenance District, seconded by Council Member Kurtz. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES — 7 (Mayor Aitken and Council Members Leon, Balius, Rubalcava, Kurtz, Maahs, and Meeks); NOES — 0. Motion carried. PUBLIC COMMENTS (non -agenda it : None City Council Minutes of June 23, 2026 Page 49 of 49 COUNCIL AGENDA SETTING: Council Member Kurtz requested that staff prepare a report regarding a biking and walking path along Olive Street south of Vermont to be shared with the community. Mayor Pro Tern Leon requested to meet with staff to discuss next steps to include the Little Arabia Business Improvement District as part of the City's Economic Development Strategic Plan. Council Member Maahs requested to meet with staff regarding backyard beekeeping practices. She shared that a resident approached her about the benefits of backyard beekeeping. She requested an evaluation of policies from surrounding cities and their potential negative impacts. Mayor Aitken requested to include an evaluation of the City's regulations regarding backyard chickens, including the current limits allowed under the Municipal Code and a comparison of other cities. Council Member Rubalcava requested an informational update regarding the City's efforts to enforce the State's rent control laws in Anaheim. ADJOURNMENT: With no further business before the Council, Mayor Aitken adjourned the City Council, in memory of Darnell Jones and Paul Samuel Hinojosa, at 8:57 p.m I P,,submitted, C From: Concerned Anaheim Residents Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2026 3:29 PM To: Public Comment; Christine Nguyen Cc: ProhousingPolicies@hcd.ca.gov; prohousingincentive@hcd.ca.gov Subject: [EXTERNAL] Formal OPPOSITION & Public Comment: California Pro -Housing Designation Program (PDP) Application — Material Transparency Defaults You don't often get email from Learn why this is important 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. To Christine Nguyen, the Anaheim City Clerk, Members of the Anaheim City Council, and the State HCD Review Board: The Concerned Anaheim Residents coalition is submitting this formal written comment ahead of today's 5:00 p.m. public deadline to state our strict opposition to the City of Anaheim's California Pro -Housing Designation Program (PDP) application. We demand that the state deny Anaheim's self -certified sixty-one (61) local transparency points. Under the oversight of City Attorney Robert Fabela, the city is maintaining an active, server -wide public records blackout to shield special interests, directly violating state grant requirements. We enter our formal opposition onto the permanent public and state record based on the following material merits: 1. Active CPRA Statutory Default & Deficient Responses: As of May 22, 2026, the city entered an unconditional state of Statutory Default under the California Public Records Act (CPRA). The administration has actively suppressed raw backend lobbyist portal metadata logs and intentionally misfiled urgent 24-hour statutory Delinquency Notices into standard slow queues to run out public clocks. 2. Systemic Lobbyist Disclosure Fraud & Shadow Lobbying: A completed registry audit of Curt Pringle & Associates (2023-2026) exposes a coordinated pattern of wide -scale, retroactive quarterly disclosure modifications executed right alongside major Planning Commission and City Council vote dates. Furthermore, visual evidence captures unregistered shadow lobbyists operating inside council chambers to manipulate project outcomes, utilizing unrecorded back - channel access to sitting Councilmembers. 3. Calendar Omissions & Shielding of Unsubmitted Pipelines: The city is utilizing this records default to advance multiple unsubmitted, adjacent high -density land -use pipelines under total zero -disclosure thresholds. Official municipal public calendars maintain "flat -zero" disclosures and flat -zero listed developer meetings, actively erasing and failing to record developer coordination sessions even while physical project signage is being actively installed on -site in the community. 4. Muzzling Public Participation (Pre-empting the "Modernization" Defense): To insulate city executives from public scrutiny regarding these hidden developments, the City Council voted on May 12, 2026, to codify restrictive new meeting rules. Regardless of whether these rules are actively enforced at every session, the mere codification of a discretionary 1-minute speech cap and a 90-minute meeting cutoff creates an immediate structural barrier and a documented chilling effect on civic participation. By vesting the power to arbitrarily muzzle resident testimony into the subtext of city policy, the council has built a legal mechanism designed to restrict evidence -heavy oversight. Under state HCD guidelines, it is the structural existence of these restrictive barriers, not the city's promises of benevolence, that violates the threshold requirements for open community engagement. 1. Dais Collusion & Evidence Suppression: Time -stamped visual data captures a synchronized pattern of sitting Councilmembers utilizing devices behind the dais immediately adjacent to developer lobbying team communications during active, live project deliberations. To shield this back -channel collusion from public review, the city has actively suppressed public records requests for the corresponding backend communication metadata logs and has failed to produce the public hall camera footage capturing these sequences. 2. Audit of Open, Suppressed, and Deficient Datasets: The city currently maintains an extensive backlog of unanswered or deficient Public Records Act (PRA) requests across multiple districts, systematically shielding municipal and developer liability. This includes: Stonewalled PRAs Concealing Municipal & Lobbyist Misconduct: The city has gone completely radio silent on outstanding PRA requests regarding city official and lobbyist conduct for the Anaheim Hills Festival Development Project Approval (DEV2023- 00043); deliberately withholding records that substantiate allegations of shadow lobbying, unregistered influence, and altered disclosure timelines. Procedural Deficiencies and Due Process Evasion: Municipal administration failed to acknowledge multiple formal delinquency notices, omitted critical evidence submissions, and ignored a valid Brown Act Cure & Correct demand. This includes an entirely inadequate administrative review of the project's appeal, where the city restricted public opposition to a token 10-page response against an 870-page structural appeal packet. Open, deficient PRAs regarding local neighborhood water contamination metrics. Suppressed City Council administrative records, unredacted internal communications, and deliberately unrecorded or altered lobbyist disclosure timelines. Withholding critical investigative files and body -worn camera footage from the grieving family of Albert Arzola. A municipality cannot legally pocket millions in state infrastructure funds under the guise of "local transparency" while actively operating a state of records default on its own servers to muzzle its residents and shield developer liabilities. We request that the HCD Review Board place an immediate administrative hold on Anaheim's designation. The full, itemized evidentiary files, including time -stamped visual data of unregistered shadow lobbyists and metadata audit logs, are being transmitted directly to the HCD Review Board and state enforcement agencies under separate cover to preserve investigative integrity. Respectfully submitted, The Stakeholder Audit Team From: Maria Bessem Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2026 11:21 PM To: Christine Nguyen; Public Comment Subject: [EXTERNAL] Subject: Opposition to Anaheim Pursuing Prohousing Designation and Concerns Regarding Cumulative Growth Impacts 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. Mayor and Members of the Anaheim City Council, I am writing to express serious concerns regarding any effort by the City of Anaheim to pursue California's Prohousing Designation and the policies that typically accompany such a designation. While Anaheim has long supported housing development and continues to approve significant residential projects throughout the city, many residents question why the City would further commit itself to a framework that prioritizes housing production above other critical community considerations such as traffic, parking, infrastructure , public safety, and quality of life. Anaheim has already demonstrated substantial housing production. If the City is meeting or exceeding its housing obligations, residents deserve a clear explanation of why additional Prohousing commitments are necessary and what public benefits justify the potential loss of local planning flexibility. Citywide Concerns Across Anaheim,: residents are experiencing the consequences of policies that encourage higher density while reducing traditional development standards. One of the most visible impacts is parking. State and local policies increasingly support reductions in parking requirements based on assumptions about traffic use and changing transportation habits. The reality experienced by residents is very different. Families continue to own vehicles, visitors require parking, and many neighborhoods already face significant parking shortages. Overflow parking spills into surrounding residential streets, creating frustration and conflict among neighbors. Traffic congestion has similarly worsened throughout Anaheim. Residents routinely encounter longer travel times, increased cut -through traffic, and growing strain on roadways that were not designed to accommodate continued population growth without corresponding infrastructure improvements. Many residents feel that planning decisions are increasingly driven by housing production targets rather than balanced consideration of all community needs. East Anaheim and Anaheim Hills These concerns are magnified in East Anaheim, where geography, wildfire risk, and limited evacuation routes create unique public safety challenges. Residents are particularly concerned that projects are evaluated individually while the real -world impacts are cumulative. The proposed Deer Canyon development, the approved 447-unit Festival Center apartment project, future Housing Element sites, accessory dwelling units, and other anticipated development all add residents, vehicles, and evacuation demand to the same constrained transportation network. Yet each project is typically analyzed as a standalone proposal. Residents do not experience these projects individually. They experience them collectively. The critical question is not whether one project can be accommodated in isolation. The question is whether the entire Santa Ana Canyon corridor can safely accommodate the cumulative population growth that results from all approved, proposed, and anticipated projects combined. This concern is particularly important in areas affected by wildfire hazards. During a major wildfire event, residents may have only a limited number of evacuation routes available. Existing congestion already affects Santa Ana Canyon Road and surrounding corridors during ordinary daily conditions. Residents have legitimate concerns regarding what evacuation conditions would look like after full buildout of multiple high density I residential projects. Prohousing and Local Control Many residents view Prohousing designation as a signal that the City intends to further reduce barriers to development through measures such as reduced parking requirements, increased density allowances, streamlined approvals, and diminished opportunities for community input. While these policies may be promoted as tools to increase housing production, they can also weaken the City's ability to address neighborhood -specific concerns and respond to infrastructure limitations. Residents deserve assurance that Anaheim's planning decisions will continue to prioritize public safety, infrastructure capacity, traffic management, and neighborhood livability -not a prohousing designation , short-sighted and motivated by grant monies. REQUEST: Before pursuing Prohousing designation or adopting additional policies intended to accelerate residential development, we respectfully request that the City: • Conduct a comprehensive cumulative impact analysis of approved, pending, and anticipated residential projects. • Evaluate cumulative traffic and evacuation impacts throughout East Anaheim and Anaheim Hills. • Demonstrate consistency with Anaheim's adopted Safety Element and wildfire planning policies. • Assess the citywide impacts of reduced parking requirements on existing neighborhoods. • Provide residents with meaningful opportunities to participate in decisions that will permanently serve Anaheim's future. Anaheim's responsibility is not merely to approve housing. It is to balance housing with public safety, infrastructure capacity, mobility, environmental constraints, and the quality of life of existing residents. We urge the City to reject any Prohousing policies that prioritize development incentives over these equally important responsibilities. "The issue before us is not whether Anaheim should build housing. The issue is whether Anaheim should continue increasing density without first proving that our roads, parking supply, infrastructure, and evacuation systems can safely support the cumulative growth that has already been approved." Respectfully, Maria Bessem ANAHEIM, CA 92808-1001 From: Linda Sent: Saturday, June 20, 2026 10:07 AM To: Christine Nguyen; Public Comment Subject: [EXTERNAL] Concerns Regarding Prohousing Designation 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. Mayor and Members of the Anaheim City Council, I respectfully ask the City to explain why it would pursue California's Prohousing Designation when serious deficiencies have already been identified in the City's own environmental analyses and evacuation assumptions. This is not a question of whether Anaheim should build housing. It is a question of why the City would encourage even greater density before demonstrating that existing roads, infrastructure, parking, and emergency evacuation systems can safely support the growth already approved. Based on what residents experience daily, and based on the findings raised by legal experts reviewing the City's own documents, there is little evidence that they can. More importantly, this is not a situation where additional studies have never been performed. The City has already prepared environmental documents and evacuation analyses. However, our CEQA attorneys have identified significant errors and inconsistencies in those studies. Their review concluded that the Festival Center EIR relies on assumptions that conflict with Anaheim's own "Know Your Way" evacuation maps and improperly minimizes the cumulative effects of nearby developments that would depend on the same evacuation routes. The attorneys further concluded that the EIR understates wildfire and evacuation risks, omits important cumulative impacts, contains misleading assertions, and relies on inadequate and unenforceable mitigation measures that may violate CEQA requirements. Perhaps most troubling, the City Council itself previously determined that increased density and traffic on these same roadways would exacerbate evacuation risks and be detrimental to public health and safety. The Fire Chief and City staff recommended denial of the Hills Preserve project because of those concerns, and the Council agreed. Residents do not experience projects individually. We experience them collectively. East Anaheim and Anaheim Hills face unique challenges, including wildfire hazards, limited evacuation routes, and already -congested roadways. Pursuing Prohousing Designation sends the message that development incentives and grant opportunities are being prioritized over public safety and infrastructure capacity. Before seeking a designation intended to accelerate additional residential growth, the City should first address the unresolved deficiencies identified in its own environmental reviews and explain to residents why it believes increasing density is appropriate when serious concerns regarding traffic, parking, infrastructure, and evacuation safety remain unresolved. As residents already know, and as the City's own record reflects, our roads and evacuation systems are already strained. Pursuing Prohousing Designation under these circumstances would be irresponsible and contrary to the City's obligation to protect public safety and the quality of life of existing residents. Respectfully, Linda Hurley Anaheim Hills resident From: Julie Filppi Sent: Saturday, June 20, 2026 10:32 AM To: Christine Nguyen; Public Comment Cc: Ashleigh Aitken; Ryan Balius; Carlos A. Leon; Natalie Rubalcava; Norma C. Kurtz; Kristen Maahs; Natalie Meeks Subject: [EXTERNAL] Opposition to Anaheim Prohousing Designation Program Application 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. June 20, 2026 Subject: Opposition to Anaheim Prohousing Designation Program Application Dear Ms. Nguyen, I am a resident of Anaheim living within a High Fire Hazard Severity Zone and am submitting my opposition to the City's Prohousing Designation Program Application. While I understand the need to address housing affordability and availability, I am concerned that the policies highlighted in this application place a strong emphasis on accelerating housing production, reducing discretionary review, and expanding residential development opportunities without adequately addressing the unique public safety challenges faced by residents in high fire risk areas. In addition, it does not address the impactful parking shortages the residents face in West Anaheim. The application promotes increased housing density, streamlined approvals, and reduced public hearing requirements, yet provides little discussion of emergency evacuation capacity, traffic congestion during emergencies, reducing residential and commercial parking, or the cumulative impacts on neighborhoods with limited ingress and egress routes. My neighborhood already experiences limited parking and constrained roadway access. During a wildfire or other emergency, additional residential density could significantly worsen evacuation conditions for existing and future residents. As it stands today, the City has acknowledged that the area will experience a 3+ hour evacuation time estimate. This is already a critical safety issue. Before seeking a Prohousing Designation, the City should first demonstrate that current infrastructure; emergency access, evacuation planning, parking, and public safety resources can adequately support increased development throughout the City and particularly in fire -prone areas. This designation, as it is worded, will remove the City's ability to challenge future development with any of these issues. It is bad for Anaheim public health and safety. I request that the City reconsider this application or, at a minimum, include language that protects the safety of existing and future residents. I understand that the City will be awarded points, which will translate to money, but is it worth relinquishing even more control to the State for the almighty dollar? This is the City of Anaheim. The State needs the economy generated here. You are a powerful City. Why give away the power you possess for this very short sighted Prohousing Designation Program. It is not a good thing for the West side or the East side of Anaheim. Thank you for your consideration of these concerns. Sincerely, Julie Filppi, Anaheim Resident since 1972 From: Gillian May Hung Sent: Saturday, June 20, 2026 10:56 AM To: Christine Nguyen; Public Comment Subject: [EXTERNAL] Opposition of the Pro Housing designation [You don't often get email from Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderidentification ] 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. Mayor and Members of the Anaheim City Council, I respectfully ask the City to explain why it would pursue California's Prohousing Designation when significant concerns about traffic, parking, infrastructure, and evacuation safety remain unresolved. This is not a question of whether Anaheim should build housing. It is a question of why the City would encourage even greater density before demonstrating that our roads, infrastructure, and emergency evacuation systems can safely support the growth already approved. The City has already prepared studies, but independent CEQA counsel identified serious deficiencies in the City's own analyses, including inconsistencies with Anaheim's adopted evacuation plans and failures to adequately account for cumulative impacts. Even more concerning, the City Council, City staff, and the Fire Chief previously concluded that additional density on these same roadways would increase evacuation risks and threaten public safety. East Anaheim and Anaheim Hills are located in a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone, where evacuation is a matter of life and death. Residents have already experienced the realities of wildfire and gridlock. Seeking Prohousing Designation and state funding to encourage even greater density while these unresolved safety risks remain is irresponsible. Public safety must come before development incentives. Anaheim should not be seeking state incentives to encourage additional density when it has yet to demonstrate that the growth already approved can be safely accommodated. Respectfully, GillianMay & Richard Lin Anaheim Hills resident Sent from my iPhone From: Naomi Goodwin Sent: Saturday, June 20, 2026 11:07 AM To: Christine Nguyen; Public Comment Subject: [EXTERNAL] Opposition to California's Prohousing Designation You don't often get email from Learn why this is important 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. Dear Mayor and Members of the Anaheim City Council, East Anaheim and Anaheim Hills are located in a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone, where evacuation is a matter of life and death. Residents have already experienced the realities of wildfire and gridlock. I respectfully ask the City to explain why it would pursue California's Prohousing Designation when significant concerns about traffic, parking, infrastructure, and evacuation safety remain unresolved. This is not a question of whether Anaheim should build housing. It is a question of why the City would encourage even greater density before demonstrating that our roads, infrastructure, and emergency evacuation systems can safely support the growth already approved. The City has already prepared studies, but independent CEQA counsel identified serious deficiencies in the City's own analyses, including inconsistencies with Anaheim's adopted evacuation plans and failures to adequately account for cumulative impacts. Even more concerning, the City Council, City staff, and the Fire Chief previously concluded that additional density on these same roadways would increase evacuation risks and threaten public safety. Seeking Prohousing Designation and state funding to encourage even greater density while these unresolved safety risks remain is irresponsible. Public safety must come before development incentives. Anaheim should not be seeking state incentives to encourage additional density when it has yet to demonstrate that the growth already approved can be safely accommodated. Respectfully, Naomi Goodwin Anaheim Hills resident From: Teresa P Sent: Saturday, June 20, 2026 11:09 AM To: Public Comment; Christine Nguyen Subject: [EXTERNAL] Against Prohousing Designation You don't often get email from Learn why this is important 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. Mayor and Members of the Anaheim City Council, I respectfully ask the City to explain why it would pursue California's Prohousing Designation when significant concerns about traffic, parking, infrastructure, and evacuation safety remain unresolved. This is not a question of whether Anaheim should build housing. It is a question of why the City would encourage even greater density before demonstrating that our roads, infrastructure, and emergency evacuation systems can safely support the growth already approved. The City has already prepared studies, but independent CEQA counsel identified serious deficiencies in the City's own analyses, including inconsistencies with Anaheim's adopted evacuation plans and failures to adequately account for cumulative impacts. Even more concerning, the City Council, City staff, and the Fire Chief previously concluded that additional density on these same roadways would increase evacuation risks and threaten public safety. East Anaheim and Anaheim Hills are located in a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone, where evacuation is a matter of life and death. Residents have already experienced the realities of wildfire and gridlock. Seeking Prohousing Designation and state funding to encourage even greater density while these unresolved safety risks remain is irresponsible. Public safety must come before development incentives. Anaheim should not be seeking state incentives to encourage additional density when it has yet to demonstrate that the growth already approved can be safely accommodated. Respectfully, Teresa Ploum Anaheim Hills resident From: David Walser Sent: Saturday, June 20, 2026 12:08 PM To: Christine Nguyen; Public Comment Subject: [EXTERNAL] California Prohousing Designation You don't often get email from Learn why this is important 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. Mayor and Members of the Anaheim City Council, I am requesting that the City Council members carefully consider the ramifications of pursuing the Prohousing Designation when an adequate fire evacuation safety plan hasn't been established yet. Allowing developers and the State of California to control the life safety of the residents of the east Anaheim is a recipe for disaster when the next fire event arrives. Thank you in advance for considering this important point. David Walser A 35 year resident of East Anaheim 1 From: Dawn Dinh Sent: Saturday, June 20, 2026 1:08 PM To: Christine Nguyen Cc: Public Comment Subject: [EXTERNAL] California's Prohousing Designation Anaheim Hills You don't often get email from . Learn why this is important 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. Mayor and Members of the Anaheim City Council, I respectfully ask the City to explain why it would pursue California's Prohousing Designation when significant concerns about traffic, parking, infrastructure, and evacuation safety remain unresolved. This is not a question of whether Anaheim should build housing. It is a question of why the City would encourage even greater density before demonstrating that our roads, infrastructure, and emergency evacuation systems can safely support the growth already approved. The City has already prepared studies, but independent CEQA counsel identified serious deficiencies in the City's own analyses, including inconsistencies with Anaheim's adopted evacuation plans and failures to adequately account for cumulative impacts. Even more concerning, the City Council, City staff, and the Fire Chief previously concluded that additional density on these same roadways would increase evacuation risks and threaten public safety. East Anaheim and Anaheim Hills are located in a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone, where evacuation is a matter of life and death. Residents have already experienced the realities of wildfire and gridlock. Seeking Prohousing Designation and state funding to encourage even greater density while these unresolved safety risks remain is irresponsible. Public safety must come before development incentives. Anaheim should not be seeking state incentives to encourage additional density when it has yet to demonstrate that the growth already approved can be safely accommodated. Respectfully, Dawn Dinh Anaheim hills resident Sent from my iPhone From: Grace McGee Sent: Saturday, June 20, 2026 1:13 PM To: Christine Nguyen; Public Comment Subject: [EXTERNAL] Do not pursue Pro Housing Designation, until existing infrastructure is greatly improved! 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. Please do not pursue the Pro housing Designation, until evacuation infrastructure is greatly improved in east Anaheim Hills. It is dangerous and irresponsible to do this, knowing it already takes 3 hours to go 2 miles west from Weir to Imperial during an evacuation, especially when 400+ more units, with 1,200 more cars!!!, were approved for the Festival Center, plus all the new cemetery traffic we will have. Please make existing citizen safety your top priority. Please!!! Sincerely, Grace McGee Weir/Serrano homeowner Sent from my iPhone From: Elizabeth Henry Sent: Saturday, June 20, 2026 2:26 PM To: Christine Nguyen Cc: Public Comment Subject: [EXTERNAL] California Housing [You don't often get email from Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderidentification ] 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. Mayor and Members of the Anaheim City Council, I respectfully ask the City to explain why it would pursue California's Prohousing Designation when significant concerns about traffic, parking, infrastructure, and evacuation safety remain unresolved. This is not a question of whether Anaheim should build housing. It is a question of why the City would encourage even greater density before demonstrating that our roads, infrastructure, and emergency evacuation systems can safely support the growth already approved. The City has already prepared studies, but independent CEQA counsel identified serious deficiencies in the City's own analyses, including inconsistencies with Anaheim's adopted evacuation plans and failures to adequately account for cumulative impacts. Even more concerning, the City Council, City staff, and the Fire Chief previously concluded that additional density on these same roadways would increase evacuation risks and threaten public safety. East Anaheim and Anaheim Hills are located in a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone, where evacuation is a matter of life and death. Residents have already experienced the realities of wildfire and gridlock. Seeking Prohousing Designation and state funding to encourage even greater density while these unresolved safety risks remain is irresponsible. Public safety must come before development incentives. Anaheim should not be seeking state incentives to encourage additional density when it has yet to demonstrate that the growth already approved can be safely accommodated. As a final statement, I have a hard time understanding why you would risk lives? My life, my families, my neighbors. I sat on Serrano during the Canyon 2 Fire. It was terrifying! It took me 2 hours to get to my Mom at the Meridian. Can you explain to me how you would feel about people losing their lives for the sake of greed? Respectfully, Elizabeth Henry Sent from my iPhone From: Adrianna Gutierrez Sent: Saturday, June 20, 2026 3:22 PM To: Christine Nguyen Cc: Public Comment Subject: [EXTERNAL] Anaheim Hills You don't often get email from Learn why this is important 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. Mayor and Members of the Anaheim City Council, I respectfully ask the City to explain why it would pursue California's Prohousing Designation when significant concerns about traffic, parking, infrastructure, and evacuation safety remain unresolved. This is not a question of whether Anaheim should build housing. It is a question of why the City would encourage even greater density before demonstrating that our roads, infrastructure, and emergency evacuation systems can safely support the growth already approved. The City has already prepared studies, but independent CEQA counsel identified serious deficiencies in the City's own analyses, including inconsistencies with Anaheim's adopted evacuation plans and failures to adequately account for cumulative impacts. Even more concerning, the City Council, City staff, and the Fire Chief previously concluded that additional density on these same roadways would increase evacuation risks and threaten public safety. East Anaheim and Anaheim Hills are located in a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone, where evacuation is a matter of life and death. Residents have already experienced the realities of wildfire and gridlock. Seeking Prohousing Designation and state funding to encourage even greater density while these unresolved safety risks remain is irresponsible. Public safety must come before development incentives. Anaheim should not be seeking state incentives to encourage additional density when it has yet to demonstrate that the growth already approved can be safely accommodated. Respectfully, Adrianna Gutierrez Anaheim Hills resident From: Anita Yacoub Sent: Saturday, June 20, 2026 9:45 PM To: Christine Nguyen Cc: Public Comment Subject: [EXTERNAL] Prohousing Designation You don't often get email from Learn why this is important 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. Mayor and Members of the Anaheim City Council, I respectfully ask the City to explain why it would pursue California's Prohousing Designation when significant concerns about traffic, parking, infrastructure, and evacuation safety remain unresolved. This is not a question of whether Anaheim should build housing. It is a question of why the City would encourage even greater density before demonstrating that our roads, infrastructure, and emergency evacuation systems can safely support the growth already approved. The City has already prepared studies, but independent CEQA counsel identified serious deficiencies in the City's own analyses, including inconsistencies with Anaheim's adopted evacuation plans and failures to adequately account for cumulative impacts. Even more concerning, the City Council, City staff, and the Fire Chief previously concluded that additional density on these same roadways would increase evacuation risks and threaten public safety. East Anaheim and Anaheim Hills are located in a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone, where evacuation is a matter of life and death. Residents have already experienced the realities of wildfire and gridlock. Seeking Prohousing Designation and state funding to encourage even greater density while these unresolved safety risks remain is irresponsible. Public safety must come before development incentives. Anaheim should not be seeking state incentives to encourage additional density when it has yet to demonstrate that the growth already approved can be safely accommodated. Respectfully, Dr. Anita Yacoub Anaheim Hills resident From: Ekta Parikh Sent: Saturday, June 20, 2026 10:35 PM To: Christine Nguyen Cc: Public Comment Subject: [EXTERNAL] Comments regarding the Pro Housing Designation You don't often get email from Learn why this is important 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. Mayor and Members of the Anaheim City Council, I respectfully ask the City to explain why it would pursue California's Prohousing Designation when significant concerns about traffic, parking, infrastructure, and evacuation safety remain unresolved. This is not a question of whether Anaheim should build housing. It is a question of why the City would encourage even greater density before demonstrating that our roads, infrastructure, and emergency evacuation systems can safely support the growth already approved. The City has already prepared studies, but independent CEQA counsel identified serious deficiencies in the City's own analyses, including inconsistencies with Anaheim's adopted evacuation plans and failures to adequately account for cumulative impacts. Even more concerning, the City Council, City staff, and the Fire Chief previously concluded that additional density on these same roadways would increase evacuation risks and threaten public safety. East Anaheim and Anaheim Hills are located in a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone, where evacuation is a matter of life and death. Residents have already experienced the realities of wildfire and gridlock. Seeking Prohousing Designation and state funding to encourage even greater density while these unresolved safety risks remain is irresponsible. Public safety must come before development incentives. Anaheim should not be seeking state incentives to encourage additional density when it has yet to demonstrate that the growth already approved can be safely accommodated. Respectfully, —Ekta Parikh From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: You don't often get email from Adriana Sung Saturday, June 20, 2026 11:17 PM Christine Nguyen Public Comment [EXTERNAL] Prohousing Designation Learn whV this is important 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. Mayor and Members of the Anaheim City Council, I respectfully ask the City to explain why it would pursue California's Prohousing Designation when significant concerns about traffic, parking, infrastructure, and evacuation safety remain unresolved. This is not a question of whether Anaheim should build housing. It is a question of why the City would encourage even greater density before demonstrating that our roads, infrastructure, and emergency evacuation systems can safely support the growth already approved. The City has already prepared studies, but independent CEQA counsel identified serious deficiencies in the City's own analyses, including inconsistencies with Anaheim's adopted evacuation plans and failures to adequately account for cumulative impacts. Even more concerning, the City Council, City staff, and the Fire Chief previously concluded that additional density on these same roadways would increase evacuation risks and threaten public safety. East Anaheim and Anaheim Hills are located in a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone, where evacuation is a matter of life and death. Residents have already experienced the realities of wildfire and gridlock. Seeking Prohousing Designation and state funding to encourage even greater density while these unresolved safety risks remain is irresponsible. Public safety must come before development incentives. Anaheim should not be seeking state incentives to encourage additional density when it has yet to demonstrate that the growth already approved can be safely accommodated. Respectfully, Adriana Sung Anaheim Hills resident From: Michael Wakely Sent: Sunday, June 21, 2026 2:50 PM To: cnguyen@anaheim.net; Public Comment Subject: [EXTERNAL] FW: Anaheim development update / call to action You don't often get email from Lea hv this is rloprj _ r) 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. Dear Mayor Aitken and Members of the Anaheim City Council, I support responsible housing development in Anaheim, but I am asking you to oppose the City's Prohousing Designation application. Anaheim needs housing, and I understand the importance of creating opportunities for new homes. However, supporting housing does not mean the city should give up local control or agree to policies that limit Anaheim's ability to respond to real -world problems. Every project is different. Some may be appropriate, while others may create serious concerns with traffic, parking, infrastructure, public safety, wildfire evacuation, or neighborhood compatibility. The City Council needs to preserve its ability to evaluate each project on its own merits and require changes when necessary. I am especially concerned that this designation does not appear to clearly protect Anaheim's ability to address wildfire evacuation issues or other safety concerns. Housing production should not come at the expense of public safety. I am also concerned that the Prohousing framework rewards reduced or inadequate parking. Good housing policy should create livable communities, not shift parking problems onto nearby residents, businesses, and neighborhoods. Anaheim also needs flexibility in responding to homelessness. The city should not lock itself into a policy framework that could limit future options for shelter, services, enforcement, public safety, or neighborhood protection. This is bad for all of Anaheim. We can support responsible development without accepting a designation that weakens local decision -making. Please oppose the Prohousing Designation application and keep Anaheim's housing decisions local, balanced, and accountable. Sincerely, Thanks, Mike Michael R. Wakely From: Marla Chapman Sent: Sunday, June 21, 2026 2:56 PM To: Christine Nguyen <CNguyen2@anaheim.net>; Public Comment <publiccomment@anaheim.net>; publiccomments@anaheim.net Subject: [EXTERNAL] Opposing the Prohousing Designation application You don't often get email from . Learn why this is important 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. Dear Mayor Aitken and Members of the Anaheim City Council, I support responsible housing development in Anaheim, but I am asking you to oppose the City's Prohousing Designation application. Anaheim needs housing, and I understand the importance of creating opportunities for new homes. However, supporting housing does not mean the city should give up local control or agree to policies that limit Anaheim's ability to respond to real -world problems. Every project is different. Some may be appropriate, while others may create serious concerns with traffic, parking, infrastructure, public safety, wildfire evacuation, or neighborhood compatibility. The City Council needs to preserve its ability to evaluate each project on its own merits and require changes when necessary. I am especially concerned that this designation does not appear to clearly protect Anaheim's ability to address wildfire evacuation issues or other safety concerns. Housing production should not come at the expense of public safety. I am also concerned that the Prohousing framework rewards reduced or inadequate parking. Good housing policy should create livable communities, not shift parking problems onto nearby residents, businesses, and neighborhoods. Anaheim also needs flexibility in responding to homelessness. The city should not lock itself into a policy framework that could limit future options for shelter, services, enforcement, public safety, or neighborhood protection. This is bad for all of Anaheim. We can support responsible development without accepting a designation that weakens local decision -making. Please oppose the Prohousing Designation application and keep Anaheim's housing decisions local, balanced, and accountable. Warmly, Marla Chapman From: Betty Farnsworth Sent: Monday, June 22, 2026 8:48 AM To: cnugyen2@anaheim.net; Ashleigh Aitken; Carlos A. Leon; Natalie Rubalcava; Kristen Maahs; Norma C. Kurtz; Ryan Balius; Natalie Meeks Cc: Public Comment Subject: [EXTERNAL] Prohousing Designation 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. Mayor and Members of the Anaheim City Council, I understand the city is considering submitting for Prohousing designation. Please take the necessary time to review the parameters of this designation carefully. California's Prohousing Designation Program incentivizes local governments to streamline development. However, critics and policy experts highlight notable drawbacks: it can bypass vital local input and safety reviews, fails to directly force physical construction, and awards points for loosely related criteria that don't always accelerate housing supply. Here is a breakdown of the main criticisms: 1. Weak Direct Impact on Actual Housing The designation provides state funding preferences and priority processing, but it does not actually build units or force private developers to break ground. A policy analysis from the Terner Center notes that some jurisdictions struggle with market -rate labor and material costs, making the designation ineffective at truly boosting housing supply without deep subsidies. 2. Bypass of Community Input & Safety Reviews For many residents, particularly in hazard -prone areas like Anaheim Hills, the biggest negative is that "prohousing" policies often force cities to fast -track dense development in zones facing severe wildfire risks or traffic bottlenecks. Critics argue these top -down state pushes disregard vital resident feedback and community -specific safety constraints. 3. Flawed Point and Scoring Systems 1 The California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) scores jurisdictions across various policy categories to grant the status. However, the Terner Center's evaluation concluded that several qualifying criteria (such as adopting universal design ordinances, reducing alternative transportation barriers, or counting ADU policies twice) do not explicitly or directly increase a city's housing production. 4. Financial Strain on Municipal Budgets Some local municipalities and advocacy groups have pushed back because adding large volumes of rental housing or affordable units doesn't inherently expand a city's local property tax base. Because new residential units bring increased infrastructural demands (schools, roads, utilities) but generate less revenue, existing homeowners often worry they will shoulder the burden of rising municipal expenses down the road. I respectfully ask the City to explain why it would pursue California's Prohousing Designation when significant concerns about traffic, parking, infrastructure, and evacuation safety remain unresolved. This is not a question of whether Anaheim should build housing. It is a question of why the City would encourage even greater density before demonstrating that our roads, infrastructure, and emergency evacuation systems can safely support the growth already approved. The City has already prepared studies, but independent CEQA counsel identified serious deficiencies in the City's own analyses, including inconsistencies with Anaheim's adopted evacuation plans and failures to adequately account for cumulative impacts. Even more concerning, the City Council, City staff, and the Fire Chief previously concluded that additional density on these same roadways would increase evacuation risks and threaten public safety. East Anaheim and Anaheim Hills are located in a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone, where evacuation is a matter of life and death. Residents have already experienced the realities of wildfire and gridlock. Seeking Prohousing Designation and state funding to encourage even greater density while these unresolved safety risks remain is irresponsible. Public safety must come before development incentives. Anaheim should not be seeking state incentives to encourage additional density when it has yet to demonstrate that the growth already approved can be safely accommodated. Please do not submit for this designation, retain your power and support your constituents. Respectfully, Anaheim Resident Betty Farnsworth N From: Katherine Novich Sent: Monday, June 22, 2026 10:59 AM To: Christine Nguyen Cc: Public Comment; Katherine Novich Subject: [EXTERNAL] Prohousing Designation Application - Oppose You don't often get email from Learn why this is important 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. Good Morning, I'm opposed to the Prohousing Designation Application, I respectfully ask the Anaheim City Council to oppose and withdraw the Prohousing Designation application. By doing so, it preserves Anaheim's ability to make local decisions, protect residents, businesses and neighborhoods, and public safety. This policy is detrimental to all Anaheim as it is a one -size -fits all STATE housing policy and takes the control away from our City Council, who knows our city, the residents, and our needs. The STATE does not. Regards, Katherine Novich (Anaheim resident for over 60 years) From: Christel Andersson Sent: Monday, June 22, 2026 10:47 AM To: Christine Nguyen Cc: Public Comment Subject: [EXTERNAL] Comments on proposed pro housing Designation [You don't often get email from Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderidentification ] 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. Mayor and Members of the Anaheim City Council, I respectfully ask the City to explain why it would pursue California's Prohousing Designation when significant concerns about traffic, parking, infrastructure, and evacuation safety remain unresolved. This is not a question of whether Anaheim should build housing. It is a question of why the City would encourage even greater density before demonstrating that our roads, infrastructure, and emergency evacuation systems can safely support the growth already approved. The City has already prepared studies, but independent CEQA counsel identified serious deficiencies in the City's own analyses, including inconsistencies with Anaheim's adopted evacuation plans and failures to adequately account for cumulative impacts. Even more concerning, the City Council, City staff, and the Fire Chief previously concluded that additional density on these same roadways would increase evacuation risks and threaten public safety. East Anaheim and Anaheim Hills are located in a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone, where evacuation is a matter of life and death. Residents have already experienced the realities of wildfire and gridlock. Seeking Prohousing Designation and state funding to encourage even greater density while these unresolved safety risks remain is irresponsible. Public safety must come before development incentives. Anaheim should not be seeking state incentives to encourage additional density when it has yet to demonstrate that the growth already approved can be safely accommodated. Respectfully, Christel & Kent Andersson Anaheim Hills resident From: Kathy Nunley Sent: Monday, June 22, 2026 3:38 PM To: Christine Nguyen Cc: Public Comment Subject: [EXTERNAL] Prohousing Designation You don't often get email from Learn why this is important 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. I am writing to express my opposition to the Prohousing Designation. Who asked the city staff to create this application? Which council members have projects currently needing grant money? If the City of Anaheim has already exceeded the criteria for membership, why would they then need to sign a pledge of any type? The State of California is a cesspool of fraud. Why would our city enter into an open- ended pledge of any type with the state? If our mayor and council members think that this will be a feather in their caps, something to make them look good, they need to explain themselves. Hold a town hall meeting! Get out with the citizens of Anaheim and tell us why we need this designation. They won't because they know the support from constituents isn't there. That should be enough for them to squash this. Look at how we have already paid the price because of their quest to be some sort of beacon; the shining city on top of the hill. Look at how we have already been blindsided by the decisions Aiken, Meeks and all the council have made behind closed doors. I don't trust a single one of them. Not many citizens of Anaheim Hills do. How much excess tax income does the City of Anaheim get annually from Disneyland? How does that play into all of this? We, the good citizens of Anaheim Hills, do not want "homes" stuck into every nook and cranny in our city. This is not what we signed up for. We don't have the infrastructure. We don't have anymore room. Safety is also an issue. WE DO NOT WANT THIS TYPE OF DECISION TAKEN OUT OF OUR HANDS AND INTO THE HANDS OF THE CORRUPT STATE OF CALIFORNIA. Kathy Nunley 1 From: Alli Valdivia Sent: Monday, June 22, 2026 4:12 PM To: Public Comment Subject: [EXTERNAL] Prohousing Designation [You don't often get email from Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderidentification ] 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. I understand the city is considering submitting for Prohousing designation. Please take the necessary time to review the parameters of this designation carefully. California's Prohousing Designation Program (https://www.hcd.ca.gov/planning-and-research/prohousing) incentivizes local governments to streamline development. However, critics and policy experts highlight notable drawbacks: it can bypass vital local input and safety reviews, fails to directly force physical construction, and awards points for loosely related criteria that don't always accelerate housing supply. Here is a breakdown of the main criticisms: 1. Weak Direct Impact on Actual Housing The designation provides state funding preferences and priority processing, but it does not actually build units or force private developers to break ground. A policy analysis from the Terner Center notes that some jurisdictions struggle with market -rate labor and material costs, making the designation ineffective at truly boosting housing supply without deep subsidies. 2. Bypass of Community Input & Safety Reviews For many residents, particularly in hazard -prone areas like Anaheim Hills,the biggest negative is that "prohousing" policies often force cities to fast -track dense development in zones facing severe wildfire risks or traffic bottlenecks. Critics argue these top -down state pushes disregard vital resident feedback and community -specific safety constraints. 3. Flawed Point and Scoring Systems The California Department of Housing and Community Development scores jurisdictions across various policy categories to grant the status. However, the Terner Center's evaluation concluded that several qualifying criteria (such as adopting universal design ordinances, reducing alternative transportation barriers, or counting ADU policies twice) do not explicitly or directly increase a city's housing production. 4. Financial Strain on Municipal Budgets Some local municipalities and advocacy groups have pushed back because adding large volumes of rental housing or affordable units doesn't inherently expand a city's local property tax base. Because new residential units bring increased infrastructural demands (schools, roads, utilities) but generate less revenue, existing homeowners often worry they will shoulder the burden of rising municipal expenses down the road. I respectfully ask the City to explain why it would pursue California's Prohousing Designation when significant concerns about traffic, parking, infrastructure, and evacuation safety remain unresolved. This is not a question of whether Anaheim should build housing. It is a question of why the City would encourage even greater density before demonstrating that our roads, infrastructure, and emergency evacuation systems can safely support the growth already approved. The City has already prepared studies, but independent CEQA counsel identified serious deficiencies in the City's own analyses, including inconsistencies with Anaheim's adopted evacuation plans and failures to adequately account for cumulative impacts. Even more concerning, the City Council, City staff, and the Fire Chief previously concluded that additional density on these same roadways would increase evacuation risks and threaten public safety. East Anaheim and Anaheim Hills are located in a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone, where evacuation is a matter of life and death. Residents have already experienced the realities of wildfire and gridlock. Seeking Prohousing Designation and state funding to encourage even greater density while these unresolved safety risks remain is irresponsible. Public safety must come before development incentives. Anaheim should not be seeking state incentives to encourage additional density when it has yet to demonstrate that the growth already approved can be safely accommodated. Please do not submit for this designation, retain your power and support your constituents. Respectfully, Anaheim Resident Allison Valdivia From: Jennifer Hillyer Sent: Monday, June 22, 2026 4:27 PM To: Christine Nguyen Cc: Public Comment Subject: [EXTERNAL] Objection to California Prohousing Designation You don't often get email fro Learn why this is important 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. Mayor and Members of the Anaheim City Council, I respectfully ask the City to explain why it would pursue California's Prohousing Designation when significant concerns about traffic, parking, infrastructure, and evacuation safety remain unresolved. This is not a question of whether Anaheim should build housing. It is a question of why the City would encourage even greater density before demonstrating that our roads, infrastructure, and emergency evacuation systems can safely support the growth already approved. The City has already prepared studies, but independent CEQA counsel identified serious deficiencies in the City's own analyses, including inconsistencies with Anaheim's adopted evacuation plans and failures to adequately account for cumulative impacts. Even more concerning, the City Council, City staff, and the Fire Chief previously concluded that additional density on these same roadways would increase evacuation risks and threaten public safety. East Anaheim and Anaheim Hills are located in a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone, where evacuation is a matter of life and death. Residents have already experienced the realities of wildfire and gridlock. Seeking Prohousing Designation and state funding to encourage even greater density while these unresolved safety risks remain is irresponsible. Public safety must come before development incentives. Anaheim should not be seeking state incentives to encourage additional density when it has yet to demonstrate that the growth already approved can be safely accommodated. Respectfully, Jennifer Hillyer Anaheim Hills resident From: Alli Sent: Monday, June 22, 2026 4:30 PM To: cnguyen2@anaheim.nwt Cc: Public Comment Subject: [EXTERNAL] Prohousing designation [You don't often get email from Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderidentification ] 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. Mayor and Members of the Anaheim City Council, I respectfully ask the City to explain why it would pursue California's Prohousing Designation when significant concerns about traffic, parking, infrastructure, and evacuation safety remain unresolved. This is not a question of whether Anaheim should build housing. It is a question of why the City would encourage even greater density before demonstrating that our roads, infrastructure, and emergency evacuation systems can safely support the growth already approved. The City has already prepared studies, but independent CEQA counsel identified serious deficiencies in the City's own analyses, including inconsistencies with Anaheim's adopted evacuation plans and failures to adequately account for cumulative impacts. Even more concerning, the City Council, City staff, and the Fire Chief previously concluded that additional density on these same roadways would increase evacuation risks and threaten public safety. East Anaheim and Anaheim Hills are located in a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone, where evacuation is a matter of life and death. Residents have already experienced the realities of wildfire and gridlock. Seeking Prohousing Designation and state funding to encourage even greater density while these unresolved safety risks remain is irresponsible. Public safety must come before development incentives. Anaheim should not be seeking state incentives to encourage additional density when it has yet to demonstrate that the growth already approved can be safely accommodated. Respectfully, Juan Valdivia Anaheim Hills resident Sent from my wife's iPhone From: Danielle Gorsha Sent: Monday, June 22, 2026 4:54 PM To: Christine Nguyen; Public Comment Subject: [EXTERNAL] Feedback: California's Prohousing Designation You don't often get email from Learn why this is important 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. Hello Mayor and Members of the Anaheim City Council, I respectfully ask the City to explain why it would pursue California's Prohousing Designation when significant concerns about traffic, parking, infrastructure, and evacuation safety remain unresolved. This is not a question of whether Anaheim should build housing. It is a question of why the City would encourage even greater density before demonstrating that our roads, infrastructure, and emergency evacuation systems can safely support the growth already approved. The City has already prepared studies, but independent CEQA counsel identified serious deficiencies in the City's own analyses, including inconsistencies with Anaheim's adopted evacuation plans and failures to adequately account for cumulative impacts. Even more concerning, the City Council, City staff, and the Fire Chief previously concluded that additional density on these same roadways would increase evacuation risks and threaten public safety. East Anaheim and Anaheim Hills are located in a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone, where evacuation is a matter of life and death. Residents have already experienced the realities of wildfire and gridlock. Seeking Prohousing Designation and state funding to encourage even greater density while these unresolved safety risks remain is irresponsible. Public safety must come before development incentives. Anaheim should not be seeking state incentives to encourage additional density when it has yet to demonstrate that the growth already approved can be safely accommodated. Respectfully, Danielle Gorsha Small Business owner and Anaheim Hills resident From: WENDY SOWSKI Sent: Monday, June 22, 2026 7:56 PM To: Christine Nguyen; Public Comment Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Pro housing Designation [You don't often get email from Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderidentification ] 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. Mayor and Members of the Anaheim City Council, I respectfully ask the City to explain why it would pursue California's Prohousing Designation when significant concerns about traffic, parking, infrastructure, and evacuation safety remain unresolved. This is not a question of whether Anaheim should build housing. It is a question of why the City would encourage even greater density before demonstrating that our roads, infrastructure, and emergency evacuation systems can safely support the growth already approved. The City has already prepared studies, but independent CEQA counsel identified serious deficiencies in the City's own analyses, including inconsistencies with Anaheim's adopted evacuation plans and failures to adequately account for cumulative impacts. Even more concerning, the City Council, City staff, and the Fire Chief previously concluded that additional density on these same roadways would increase evacuation risks and threaten public safety. East Anaheim and Anaheim Hills are located in a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone, where evacuation is a matter of life and death. Residents have already experienced the realities of wildfire and gridlock. Seeking Prohousing Designation and state funding to encourage even greater density while these unresolved safety risks remain is irresponsible. Public safety must come before development incentives. Anaheim should not be seeking state incentives to encourage additional density when it has yet to demonstrate that the growth already approved can be safely accommodated. Respectfully, Wendy Sowski Anaheim Hills Sent from my iPhone From: Patty Fitzjerrells Sent: Monday, June 22, 2026 8:08 PM To: Christine Nguyen Cc: Public Comment Subject: [EXTERNAL] Anaheim Hills Opposes Pro Housing Designation Due to Safety Concerns [You don't often get email from Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderidentification ] 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. Mayor and Members of the Anaheim City Council, I respectfully ask the City to explain why it would pursue California's Prohousing Designation when significant concerns about traffic, parking, infrastructure, and evacuation safety remain unresolved. This is not a question of whether Anaheim should build housing. It is a question of why the City would encourage even greater density before demonstrating that our roads, infrastructure, and emergency evacuation systems can safely support the growth already approved. The City has already prepared studies, but independent CEQA counsel identified serious deficiencies in the City's own analyses, including inconsistencies with Anaheim's adopted evacuation plans and failures to adequately account for cumulative impacts. Even more concerning, the City Council, City staff, and the Fire Chief previously concluded that additional density on these same roadways would increase evacuation risks and threaten public safety. East Anaheim and Anaheim Hills are located in a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone, where evacuation is a matter of life and death. Residents have already experienced the realities of wildfire and gridlock. Seeking Prohousing Designation and state funding to encourage even greater density while these unresolved safety risks remain is irresponsible. Public safety must come before development incentives. Anaheim should not be seeking state incentives to encourage additional density when it has yet to demonstrate that the growth already approved can be safely accommodated. Respectfully, Patricia Fitzjerrells Anaheim Hills resident of 30+ years Sent from my iPhone From: Lori Hughes Sent: Monday, June 22, 2026 8:44 PM To: Public Comment Subject: [EXTERNAL] Fwd: California's Prohousing Designation Concerns for Anaheim Hills 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. ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Lori Hughes Date: Mon, Jun 22, 2026 at 8:43 PM Subject: California's Prohousing Designation Concerns for Anaheim Hills To: <cn9uyen2 _ anaheim.net> Mayor and Members of the Anaheim city Council, I respectfully ask the City explain why it would pursue California's Prohousing Designation when significant concerns about traffic, parking, infrastructure, and evacuation safety remain unresolved. This is not a question of whether Anaheim should build housing, it is a question of why the City would encourage even greater density before demonstrating that our roads, infrastructure, and emergency evacuation systems can safely support the growth already approved. The City has already prepared studies, but independent CEQA counsel identified serious deficiencies in the City's own analysis, including inconsistencies with Anaheim's adopted evacuation plans, and failures to adequately account for the cumulative impacts. East Anaheim and Anaheim Hills are located in a Very High Fire Hazard Zone, where evacuation is a matter of life and death. Residents have already experienced the realities of wildfire and gridlock. Seeking Prohousing Designation and state funding to encourage even greater density while these safety risks remain is irresponsible. Public safety must come before development incentives. Anaheim should not be seeking state incentives to encourage additional density when it has yet to demonstrate that the growth already approved can be safely accommodated. Respect, Lori Hughes Concerned Resident From: Ally Gorsha Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2026 9:15 AM To: Christine Nguyen; Public Comment Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: California's Prohousing Designation You don't often get email from Learn why this is important 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. Dear Mayor and Members of the Anaheim City Council, I respectfully ask the City to explain why it would pursue California's Prohousing Designation when significant concerns about traffic, parking, infrastructure, and evacuation safety remain unresolved. This is not a question of whether Anaheim should build housing. It is a question of why the City would encourage even greater density before demonstrating that our roads, infrastructure, and emergency evacuation systems can safely support the growth already approved. The City has already prepared studies, but independent CEQA counsel identified serious deficiencies in the City's own analyses, including inconsistencies with Anaheim's adopted evacuation plans and failures to adequately account for cumulative impacts. Even more concerning, the City Council, City staff, and the Fire Chief previously concluded that additional density on these same roadways would increase evacuation risks and threaten public safety. East Anaheim and Anaheim Hills are located in a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone, where evacuation is a matter of life and death. Residents have already experienced the realities of wildfire and gridlock. Seeking Prohousing Designation and state funding to encourage even greater density while these unresolved safety risks remain is irresponsible. Public safety must come before development incentives. Anaheim should not be seeking state incentives to encourage additional density when it has yet to demonstrate that the growth already approved can be safely accommodated. Respectfully, Alexandra Gorsha Anaheim Hills resident From: Andrea Phelps Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2026 10:39 AM To: Christine Nguyen Cc: Public Comment Subject: [EXTERNAL] Public comment -pro housing designation [You don't often get email from Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderidentification ] 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. Mayor and Members of the Anaheim City Council, I urge you not to seek California's Prohousing Designation for the city of Anaheim. As we are all aware, Sacramento has very aggressively been stripping local governments of their ability to oversee what housing projects are constructed in their respective cities and towns. Blanket incentives, variances and regulations can have extremely negative consequences for a large and diverse city such as Anaheim. These negative consequences, including no parking for new projects, walls and buildings closer together and closer to streets and highways and smaller unit sizes substantially negatively affect residents day in and day out and outweigh any financial benefit a pro housing designation would bring. The needs for the different districts of Anaheim vary greatly. Placing blanket housing policy on all the districts will take away the councils ability to protect and make decisions that are appropriate for all of the districts of Anaheim. Please retain the small amount to local control over housing that Anaheim currently has. Developers ultimately do not care about residents, money is their only motivating factor. Any amount of decision making and oversight that can be retained will ultimately benefit the city of Anaheim as a whole. Respectfully, Andrea and Engler Phelps Anaheim Residents Sent from my iPhone From: Jackie Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2026 1:41 PM To: Christine Nguyen Cc: Public Comment Subject: [EXTERNAL] Proposed Pro Housing Designation [You don't often get email from Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderidentification ] 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. Mayor and Members of the Anaheim City Council, I respectfully ask the City to explain why it would pursue California's Prohousing Designation when significant concerns about traffic, parking, infrastructure, and evacuation safety remain unresolved. This is not a question of whether Anaheim should build housing. It is a question of why the City would encourage even greater density before demonstrating that our roads, infrastructure, and emergency evacuation systems can safely support the growth already approved. It is concerning that the City Council, City staff, and the Fire Chief previously concluded that additional density on our roadways would increase evacuation risks and threaten public safety. East Anaheim and Anaheim Hills are located in a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone, where evacuation is a matter of life and death. Residents have already experienced the realities of wildfire and gridlock. Seeking Prohousing Designation and state funding to encourage even greater density while these unresolved safety risks remain is completely irresponsible. Public safety must come before development incentives. Anaheim should not be seeking state incentives to encourage additional density when it has yet to demonstrate that the growth already approved can be safely accommodated. Respectfully, Jackie Arch 30+year Anaheim Hills resident Sent from my iPhone From: Danielle Gorsha Sent: Monday, June 22, 2026 6:56 PM To: Public Comment; Ashleigh Aitken; Carlos A. Leon; Ryan Balius; Natalie Rubalcava; Norma C. Kurtz; Kristen Maahs; Natalie Meeks Subject: [EXTERNAL] Anaheim Hills Traffic Gridlock: Potential Solutions and Concerns Attachments: Friday traffic-Anaheim-Hills.png; Saturday traffic-anaheim-hills.png You don't often get email from Learn why this is important 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. Dear Council and Traffic Department, I'm a 26-year Anaheim Hills resident and small business owner. My team and I drive throughout Anaheim for my rental business, and in fact, we have driven 88,028 miles throughout the city from 2023 to the present. We spend most of our time within six miles of Disneyland, servicing the millions of tourists staying in hotels and Airbnbs, but we drive throughout the city daily from 6 a.m. to midnight. Suffice it to say, I know the streets and traffic patterns of Anaheim. I'm always impressed with the traffic flow throughout the resort area. I also notice that police teams direct traffic during large conventions at the Convention Center as well as events at the Honda Center, Angel Stadium and busy days at the Disneyland parking structures. I rarely experience long traffic delays, even during the busiest times. The same cannot be said for Anaheim Hills. There is gridlock seven days a week on Imperial, Weir Canyon, Serrano, and Nohl Ranch. My freeway exit is Imperial Highway, but Google Maps almost always recommends I exit at either Lakeview or Lincoln/Nohl Ranch. When I do exit at Imperial, I can rarely get over into one of the two left -turn lanes onto Santa Ana Canyon. Trips to Costco, Target and nearby restaurants are not considered between 4 and 7pm. The congestion is no longer limited to Fridays at 5 p.m. The gridlock now occurs every day starting around noon. The freeway intersections are a mess, and road rage is becoming increasingly common. It is no wonder the Council receives so much pushback from residents when evaluating new developments that will add thousands of additional vehicle trips to the area. We all know that congestion on the 91 freeway and the associated cut -through traffic are the major issues. This traffic is not only overcrowding our streets, but it is also creating significant wear and tear on local roads. In addition, very few of these commuters contribute to our local economy by stopping at our stores or restaurants. I asked Al to identify solutions that other cities and countries have used to address similar problems, and the list is below. I would like to know whether any of these strategies are being considered for East Anaheim. From Al I nsight: Anaheim Hills is particularly vulnerable because congestion on the 91 freeway pushes commuters into local neighborhoods, creating exactly the type of "rat -running" or cut -through traffic problem that transportation planners study. The issue is well documented, and many cities have addressed it through targeted neighborhood traffic programs. Below are some of the most relevant solutions used by cities, including several that could realistically apply to Anaheim Hills. 1. Charging Drivers to Enter Certain Areas (Congestion Pricing) Cities install cameras or electronic toll points and charge drivers during peak hours. Examples: • Stockholm and Gothenburg, Sweden, charge vehicles entering the city center during busy hours. • Traffic volumes dropped by approximately 10% during charged periods after implementation. • Singapore, London, and parts of Chile also use electronic tolling systems to reduce congestion. How this could apply to Anaheim Hills: • Charge vehicles entering specific neighborhood zones • Only charge during peak hours (for example, 3-7 p.m.) • Exempt local residents through license plate registration This concept is sometimes called a "Low Traffic Zone" or congestion zone. 2. Restricting Turns During Rush Hour This approach is already used in many U.S. cities. Examples: • No left turns from 3-7 p.m. • No through traffic except for residents • Right -turn -only intersections These restrictions can reduce the ability of commuters to shortcut through neighborhoods. 3. "Local Traffic Only" Streets With Camera Enforcement Some cities use license -plate cameras to create local traffic zones. These systems: • Allow residents, deliveries, and emergency vehicles • Automatically fine vehicles using streets as shortcuts • Reduce through traffic while maintaining neighborhood access 4. Physical Barriers That Prevent Cut -Through Routes Examples include: • Diagonal diverters • Partial street closures • Median barriers • Dead-end conversions Q Cities such as Berkeley, California, have implemented these measures specifically to reduce cut -through traffic. 5. Traffic Calming Measures Examples include: • Speed humps • Mini traffic circles • Narrowed lanes • Raised crosswalks • Curb extensions These measures do not block vehicles but make neighborhood streets less attractive as commuter routes. 6. License -Plate Driving Restrictions Some cities restrict vehicle access based on license plate numbers to reduce traffic and pollution. While more extreme, similar concepts have been used during major events and periods of high congestion. 7. Smart Navigation Blocking Some cities now work directly with Google Maps and Waze to discourage routing through neighborhoods. Strategies include: • Changing street classifications • Adding turn restrictions • Creating traffic patterns that make routing algorithms avoid residential streets Realistic Solutions for Anaheim Hills High -impact ideas: • Rush-hour turn restrictions • Local -traffic -only zones with camera enforcement • Street diverters that break cut -through routes Medium -impact ideas: • Traffic calming measures • One-way street conversions More difficult but potentially effective: • Congestion pricing for entering certain zones • Freeway ramp metering combined with neighborhood restrictions A Strategy That Works Best Many successful cities combine: • Turn restrictions • Physical diverters • Traffic calming measures 3 Together, these strategies make neighborhood routes slower and less convenient than remaining on the freeway. Thank you for your time. I would appreciate understanding whether any of these strategies are being considered and how residents can continue this conversation with the City. Most importantly, residents need confidence that this issue is being actively addressed. Danielle Gorsha 0 L C '0 .0 C\j � H LO m 0 (D a) E 0 raw m 1� roolop i 1 • From: Sarah Hughes Sent: Friday, June 19, 2026 4:01 PM To: Christine Nguyen Subject: [EXTERNAL] Anaheim 's Prohousing Designation You don't often get email from Learn why this is important 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. I am writing to express my concern that Anaheim is considering a Prohousing Designation application and am hoping Anaheim will either oppose this or withdraw the application. The main concern is the way it seems to take away local control over housing and could limit the city's ability to respond to local problems across the whole city. Anaheim is a large city with different neighborhoods which have different needs in respect to traffic, parking, the unhoused, and public safety which the city should be able to decide themselves. Hoping you will see the need to not go ahead with this designation as it affects each district in our city. Sincerely Sarah Hughes Get Outlook for iOS From: Lori Hughes Sent: Monday, June 22, 2026 8:44 PM To: Christine Nguyen Subject: [EXTERNAL] California's Prohousing Designation Concerns for Anaheim Hills You don't often get email from Learn why this is important 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. Mayor and Members of the Anaheim city Council, I respectfully ask the City explain why it would pursue California's Prohousing Designation when significant concerns about traffic, parking, infrastructure, and evacuation safety remain unresolved. This is not a question of whether Anaheim should build housing, it is a question of why the City would encourage even greater density before demonstrating that our roads, infrastructure, and emergency evacuation systems can safely support the growth already approved. The City has already prepared studies, but independent CEQA counsel identified serious deficiencies in the City's own analysis, including inconsistencies with Anaheim's adopted evacuation plans, and failures to adequately account for the cumulative impacts. East Anaheim and Anaheim Hills are located in a Very High Fire Hazard Zone, where evacuation is a matter of life and death. Residents have already experienced the realities of wildfire and gridlock. Seeking Prohousing Designation and state funding to encourage even greater density while these safety risks remain is irresponsible. Public safety must come before development incentives. Anaheim should not be seeking state incentives to encourage additional density when it has yet to demonstrate that the growth already approved can be safely accommodated. Respect, Lori Hughes Concerned Resident From: Lori Hughes Sent: Monday, June 22, 2026 8:22 PM To: Christine Nguyen <CNguyen2@anaheim.net> Subject: [EXTERNAL] California's Prohousing Designation Concerns for Anaheim Hills from a Resident of Anaheim Hills You don't often get email from Learn why this is important 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. Mayor and Members of the Anaheim City Council, I respectfully ask the City to explain why it would pursue California's Prohousing Designation when significant concerns about traffic, parking, infrastructure, and evacuation safety remain unresolved. -his is not a question of whether Anaheim should build housing. It is a question of why the City would encourage even greater density before demonstrating that our roads, infrastructure, and emergency evacuation systems can safely support the growth already approved. The City has already prepared studies, but independent CEQA counsel identified serious deficiencies in the City's own analyses, including inconsistencies with Anaheim's adopted evacuation plans and failures to adequately account for cumulative impacts. Even more concerning, the City Council, City staff, and the Fire Chief previously concluded that additional density on these same roadways would increase evacuation risks and threaten public safety. From: Leida Erickson Sent: Monday, June 22, 2026 3:49 PM To: Christine Nguyen Subject: [EXTERNAL] CITY OF ANAHEIM RE PROHOUSING DESIGNATION You don't often get email from Learn why this is important 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. Honorable Mayor and City Council, According to Al today: Over the past decade (roughly 2016 to 2026), the population of Anaheim has experienced a slight overall decline and stabilization, contrasting with its rapid growth in earlier decades. Here is how the trend breaks down: Mid-2010s Peak: Around 2016 to 2017, Anaheim's population peaked at roughly 350,000 to 352,000 residents. The 2020 Census: By the official 2020 Census, the population was recorded at 346,824. Recent Years: Following 2020, the population experienced a minor downward trend and leveled off. As of recent 2024-2026 data and estimates, the population stands at approximately 340,000 to 344,500. Overall, Anaheim's population has decreased by roughly 2% to 3% over the last 10 years, shifting from a period of steady growth into a phase of modest decline and stabilization. In my opinion, the State of California has gone too far in usurping the power of local government. I strongly urge you to stand your ground for the betterment of Anaheim's communities and not be influenced by promises of State grant monies by passing the Prohousing Designation agreement July 14. I believe Anaheim residents will experience a decline in public safety and poorer quality of life if Anaheim commits to this agreement. Instead, be proactive and consider: • Already approved affordable housing projects that meet the State's goals for cities. • The effects of those projects with reduced, nonexistent parking space requirements on quality of life for everyone. • Increased traffic that reduces quality of life for everyone. • Housing density that puts all residents in danger for an untested "Know:Your Way" Evacuation plan, especially in "Very High Fire Risk" areas. We don't want to be the next Pacific Palisades, Altadena, or Paradise casualties (or Cypress' Hazardous Waste evacuation scare). We look to our local leaders, who know and appreciate Anaheim as we do, to put the needs and concerns of Anaheim's current residents ahead of Sacramento's goals. Sincerely, Leida Erickson Anaheim, CA 92808 From: Sent: Sunday, June 21, 2026 3:20 PM To: Christine Nguyen Cc: publiccomments@anaheim.net Subject: [EXTERNAL] City's Pro -housing Designation Application Opposition You don't often get email from - Learn why this is important 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. Dear Mayor Aitken and Members of the Anaheim City Council: Let me begin and state that I support responsible housing development in Anaheim and recognize the need to create opportunities for additional housing. However, I strongly urge you to oppose the City's Pro -housing Designation application. While Anaheim must continue to address housing needs, it should not do so by accepting a "state designation" that may diminish local control and limit the City's ability to respond to legitimate community concerns. Housing policy should empower local decision -makers, not constrain them. Every development proposal presents unique challenges and impacts. Some projects may be appropriate and beneficial, while others may create significant concerns related to traffic congestion, parking shortages, infrastructure demands, public safety, wildfire evacuation, environmental impacts, and neighborhood compatibility. The Anaheim City Council must retain the authority to carefully evaluate each proposal, require necessary modifications, and reject projects that are not in the best interests of residents. I am particularly troubled that the Pro -housing Designation does not clearly protect Anaheim's ability to address wildfire evacuation requirements and other critical public safety concerns. California has repeatedly witnessed the devastating consequences of inadequate emergency planning. Any policy that encourages increased density without fully addressing evacuation capacity and emergency response impacts places residents at unnecessary risk. Public safety must remain the City's highest priority. I am also disturbed that the Pro -housing framework rewards reductions in parking requirements. While reduced parking may appear beneficial on paper, the reality is often increased congestion, overcrowded streets, spillover parking in surrounding neighborhoods, and negative impacts on local businesses. Successful housing policy should create complete and 1 livable communities rather than transferring the burden of inadequate planning onto existing residents. In addition, Anaheim must preserve its flexibility to address homelessness and related public safety challenges in ways that best serve the community. The City should not commit itself to a policy framework that could restrict future options regarding shelter placement, supportive services, enforcement strategies, neighborhood protection, or other locally determined solutions. Anaheim can and should support responsible housing development. However, responsible growth requires balance, accountability, and local oversight. Housing production should not come at the expense of public safety, infrastructure capacity, neighborhood quality of life, or the City's ability to make decisions that reflect the unique needs of its residents. For these reasons, I respectfully request that you and the city council oppose the Pro -housing Designation application and preserve Anaheim's authority to make housing decisions locally. The City must retain the flexibility to pursue housing solutions that are responsible, sustainable, and accountable to the people who live, work, and invest in Anaheim. Thank you. Bob Wolkowicz Anaheim Hills Resident z From: marlene manzak Sent: Sunday, June 21, 2026 8:27 AM To: Christine Nguyen Cc: publicxomment@anaheim.net Subject: [EXTERNAL] Housing Project [You don't often get email from Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderidentification ] 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. Mayor and Members of the Anaheim City Council, I respectfully ask the City to explain why it would pursue California's Prohousing Designation when significant concerns about traffic, parking, infrastructure, and evacuation safety remain unresolved. This is not a question of whether Anaheim should build housing. It is a question of why the City would encourage even greater density before demonstrating that our roads, infrastructure, and emergency evacuation systems can safely support the growth already approved. The City has already prepared studies, but independent CEQA counsel identified serious deficiencies in the City's own analyses, including inconsistencies with Anaheim's adopted evacuation plans and failures to adequately account for cumulative impacts. Even more concerning, the City Council, City staff, and the Fire Chief previously concluded that additional density on these same roadways would increase evacuation risks and threaten public safety. East Anaheim and Anaheim Hills are located in a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone, where evacuation is a matter of life and death. Residents have already experienced the realities of wildfire and gridlock. Seeking Prohousing Designation and state funding to encourage even greater density while these unresolved safety risks remain is irresponsible. Public safety must come before development incentives. Anaheim should not be seeking state incentives to encourage additional density when it has yet to demonstrate that the growth already approved can be safely accommodated. Respectfully, Name Marlene Manzak Sent from my iPhone From: t hill Sent: Monday, June 22, 2026 9:08 PM To: Christine Nguyen Subject: [EXTERNAL] Oppose the Prohousing Designation You don't often get email from Learn why this is important 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. Christine, I am a resident of Anaheim writing to express my strong opposition to the Prohousing Designation proposal. After reviewing the document, it is clear that this proposal functions as a "pay for play" arrangement between the state and local municipalities. By accepting one-time grant funding, the City of Anaheim would effectively surrender its long-term right to govern and support its constituents. My specific concerns include: - Loss of Local Sovereignty: Anaheim has already exceeded its state -mandated building quotas. There is no justification for the City Council to relinquish its authority or the voting rights of its residents to the state. - Bypassing Public Oversight (Section 2E): This section would eliminate discretionary reviews and public hearings, allowing all projects to be administered solely by staff without community input. - Accelerated Administrative Timelines (Section 2G): The proposal establishes a review timeline for administrative applications of only twenty-nine (29) days, which is insufficient for thorough evaluation. - Developer Incentives (Section 31): This section outlines programs to reduce construction and infrastructure costs for developers. It appears the city is prioritizing developer profits over resident approval and established zoning laws. This proposal removes the essential voting rights of residents and prioritizes the financial interests of the state and private developers. If the City Council cedes its power to represent its constituency in this manner, it calls into question the very necessity of our local elected leadership. Sincerely, Tamara Hill Anaheim, CA 92808 From: Christa Luther Sent: Monday, June 22, 2026 9:33 AM To: Christine Nguyen Subject: [EXTERNAL] Opposition to Additional High -Density Development and Prohousing Designation in East Anaheim / Anaheim Hills You don't often get email from Learn why this is important 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. Dear Ms. Nguyen, I am writing as a resident of Anaheim Hills to express my opposition to any additional large-scale residential development and to the City's pursuit of a Prohousing Designation that could further reduce local control over planning decisions. While I understand the need for housing, I do not believe East Anaheim can continue to absorb significant additional growth without serious consequences to traffic, public safety, infrastructure, and quality of life. Traffic congestion in Anaheim Hills has already reached unacceptable levels. On many days, I am unable to leave my neighborhood in a reasonable amount of time because commuters from the Inland Empire are rerouted through our local streets to avoid congestion on the 91 Freeway. During peak periods, traffic backs up throughout the canyon area, and it is not uncommon for me to spend 30 minutes traveling less than one mile. Residents experience these conditions every day, and additional development will only make them worse. I am also deeply concerned about wildfire evacuation and public safety. Anaheim Hills and the Santa Ana Canyon corridor have limited evacuation routes. Existing traffic congestion already strains these roadways during normal conditions. Before approving additional high -density housing projects, the City should thoroughly evaluate the cumulative impact that current, approved, proposed, and future developments will have on evacuation times and emergency response capabilities. My concern is not with any one project in isolation. Rather, it is the combined impact of multiple developments, accessory dwelling units, future housing sites, and ongoing population growth on a transportation network that is already overburdened. Residents experience these impacts collectively, and planning decisions should reflect that reality. I respectfully request that the City: Conduct a comprehensive cumulative impact analysis of all approved, pending, and anticipated residential projects in East Anaheim. • Evaluate the long-term effects on traffic congestion, evacuation capacity, and public safety. • Consider infrastructure limitations before approving additional density. • Preserve meaningful opportunities for community input and local decision -making. • Prioritize public safety, infrastructure capacity, and neighborhood livability over incentives tied to Prohousing designation. Anaheim's responsibility is not simply to approve more housing. It is to ensure that growth is balanced with the safety and Opposition to Additional High -Density Development and Prohousing Designation in East Anaheim. I urge the City Council to reject policies that would encourage additional large-scale development in East Anaheim until the cumulative impacts on traffic, infrastructure, and emergency evacuation have been fully evaluated and addressed. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Christa Luther Anaheim Hills District 6 Resident From: noreen francis Sent: Sunday, June 21, 2026 3:21 PM To: Christine Nguyen Subject: [EXTERNAL] Opposition to Anaheim Pursuing Prohousing Designation. [You don't often get email from Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderidentification ] 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. Mayor and members of the Anaheim city Council, I am writing to express serious concerns regarding any effort by the city of Anaheim to pursue California's Pro, housing, designation, and policies that typically accompany such a designation.While Anaheim has long supported housing development, and continues to approve significant residential projects throughout the city, many residents question why the city would further commit itself to a framework that prioritizes housing production above other critical community considerations such as traffic, parking infrastructure, public safety, and quality of life. If the city is meeting or exceeding, it's housing obligations residence deserve a clear explanation of why additional Pro housing commitments are necessary, and what public benefits justify the potential loss of local planning flexibility. Residence are experiencing the consequences of policies that encourage higher density while reducing traditional development standards. One of the most visible impacts is parking. State and local policies increasingly support reductions in parking requirements based on assumptions about traffic use and changing transportation habits the reality experienced by residence is very different. Families continue to own vehicles, visitors require parking and many neighborhoods already face significant parking shortages overflow parking spills into surrounding residential streets, creating frustration and conflict among neighbors. Traffic congestion has similarly worsened throughout Anaheim. Residents routinely encounter longer travel times increased cut through traffic and growing strain on roadways that were not designed to accommodate continued population growth without corresponding infrastructure improvements. These concerns are magnified in East Anaheim, where geography, wildfire risk and limited evacuation routes create unique, public safety challenges. Residence are particularly concerned that projects are evaluated individually while the real world impacts are cumulative. The proposed deer Canyon development the approved for 477-unit festival center apartment project, future housing element site, accessory dwelling units and other anticipated development all add Residents vehicles and evacuation demand to the same constrained transportation network yet each project is typically analyzed as a standalone proposal. resi residence do not experience these projects individually. They experienced them collectively. The critical question is not whether one project can be accommodated in isolation. The question is whether the entire Santa Ana Canyon corridor can safely accommodate the accumulative population growth that results from all approved proposed and anticipated projects combined. The concern is particularly important in areas affected by wildfire hazards. Before pursuing Pro housing designation or adopting additional policies intended to accelerate residential development we respectfully request that the city 1-evaluate cumulative traffic and evacuation impacts throughout east Anaheim and Anaheim Hills 2-demonstrate consistency with Anaheim, safety element and wildfire planning policies 3-provide residence with meaningful opportunities to participate in decisions that will permanently serve Anaheim's future Anaheim responsibility is not merely to approve housing. It is to balance housing with public safety, infrastructure, capacity mobility, environmental constraints, and the quality of life of existing residence. We urge the city to reject any Pro housing policies that prioritize development incentives over these equally important responsibilities. Respectfully NoreenjFrancis From: Alli Sent: Monday, June 22, 2026 4:33 PM To: Christine Nguyen Subject: [EXTERNAL] Prohousing designation You don't often get email from Learn why this is important 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. Mayor and Members of the Anaheim City Council, I respectfully ask the City to explain why it would pursue California's Prohousing Designation when significant concerns about traffic, parking, infrastructure, and evacuation safety remain unresolved. This is not a question of whether Anaheim should build housing. It is a question of why the City would encourage even greater density before demonstrating that our roads, infrastructure, and emergency evacuation systems can safely support the growth already approved. The City has already prepared studies, but independent CEQA counsel identified serious deficiencies in the City's own analyses, including inconsistencies with Anaheim's adopted evacuation plans and failures to adequately account for cumulative impacts. Even more concerning, the City Council, City staff, and the Fire Chief previously concluded that additional density on these same roadways would increase evacuation risks and threaten public safety. East Anaheim and Anaheim Hills are located in a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone, where evacuation is a matter of life and death. Residents have already experienced the realities of wildfire and gridlock. Seeking Prohousing Designation and state funding to encourage even greater density while these unresolved safety risks remain is irresponsible. Public safety must come before development incentives. Anaheim should not be seeking state incentives to encourage additional density when it has yet to demonstrate that the growth already approved can be safely accommodated. Respectfully, Juan Valdivia Anaheim Hills resident From: Armida Lansner Sent: Sunday, June 21, 2026 9:49 PM To: Christine Nguyen Subject: [EXTERNAL] Prohousing Designation You don't often get email from Learn why this is important 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. Mayor and Members of the Anaheim City Council I am writing to express serious concerns regarding any effort by the City of Anaheim to pursue California's Prohousing Designation and the policies that typically accompany such a designation. While Anaheim has long supported housing development and continues to approve significant residential projects throughout the city, many of your constituents question why our City leaders would further commit our city and its residents to a state dictated framework that prioritizes housing production above other critical community considerations such as traffic, parking, infrastructure , public safety, and quality of life. Anaheim has already demonstrated substantial housing production. If the City is meeting or exceeding its housing obligations, residents deserve a clear explanation of why additional Prohousing commitments are necessary and what public benefits justify the potential loss of local planning flexibility. Citywide Concerns Across Anaheim: residents are experiencing the consequences of policies that encourage higher density while reducing traditional development standards. One of the most visible impacts is parking. State and local policies increasingly support reductions in parking requirements based on assumptions about traffic use and changing transportation habits. The reality experienced by residents is very different. Families continue to own vehicles, visitors require parking, and many neighborhoods already face significant parking shortages. Overflow parking spills into surrounding residential streets, creating frustration and conflict among neighbors. Traffic congestion has similarly worsened throughout our City. Residents routinely encounter longer travel times, increased cut - through traffic, and growing strain on roadways that were not designed to accommodate continued population growth without corresponding infrastructure improvements. Many residents feel that planning decisions are increasingly driven by housing production targets rather than balanced consideration of all community needs. East Anaheim and Anaheim Hills: These concerns are magnified in East Anaheim, where geography, wildfire risk, and limited evacuation routes create unique public safety challenges. Residents are particularly concerned that projects are evaluated independently while the real -world impacts are cumulative. The proposed Deer Canyon development, the approved 447-unit Festival Center apartment project, future Housing Element sites, accessory dwelling units, and other anticipated development all add residents, vehicles, and evacuation demand to the same constrained transportation network. Yet each project is typically analyzed as a standalone proposal. Residents do not experience these projects individually. They experience them collectively. The critical question is not whether one project can be accommodated in isolation. The question is whether the entire Santa Ana Canyon corridor can safely accommodate the cumulative population growth that results from all approved, proposed, and anticipated projects combined. This concern is particularly important in areas affected by wildfire hazards. During a major wildfire event, residents will have only a limited number of evacuation routes available. Existing congestion already affects Santa Ana Canyon Road and surrounding corridors during ordinary daily conditions. Safe and timely evacuation under conditions similar to the Palisades or Altadena fires is at high risk under current density conditions. Lives are at risk now. Residents have legitimate concerns regarding what evacuation conditions would look like after full build -out of multiple high density I residential projects. Prohousing and Local Control: Many residents view Prohousing designation as a signal that the City intends to further reduce barriers to development through measures such as reduced parking requirements, increased density allowances, streamlined approvals, and diminished opportunities for community input. While these policies may be promoted as tools to increase housing production, they can also weaken the City's ability to address neighborhood -specific concerns and respond to infrastructure limitations. Residents deserve assurance that Anaheim's planning decisions will continue to prioritize public safety, infrastructure capacity, traffic management, and neighborhood livability -not a prohousing designation, short-sighted and motivated by grant monies. REQUEST: Before pursuing Prohousing designation or adopting additional policies intended to accelerate residential development, I respectfully request that the City: • Conduct a comprehensive cumulative impact analysis of approved, pending, and anticipated residential projects. • Evaluate cumulative traffic and evacuation impacts throughout East Anaheim and Anaheim Hills. • Demonstrate consistency with Anaheim's adopted Safety Element and wildfire planning policies. • Assess the citywide impacts of reduced parking requirements on existing neighborhoods. • Provide residents with meaningful opportunities to participate in decisions that will permanently serve Anaheim's future. Anaheim's responsibility is not merely to approve housing. It is to balance housing with public safety, infrastructure capacity, mobility, environmental constraints, and the quality of life of existing residents. We urge the City to reject any Prohousing policies that prioritize development incentives over these equally important responsibilities. "The issue before us is not whether Anaheim should build housing. The issue is whether Anaheim should continue increasing density without first proving that our roads, parking supply, infrastructure, and evacuation systems can safely support the cumulative growth that has already been approved." Respectfully, Armida Lansner From: Sent: To: Subject: You don't often get email from lind Monday, June 22, 2026 1:04 AM Christine Nguyen [EXTERNAL] Prohousing Designation Learn why this is important 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. Please vote against the Prohousing Designation in our area of Anaheim Hills. The traffic on the 91 to Corona and the cars using Waze to come through our neighborhood daily off the 241 has made it so congested in our small area here in the hills. With our high fire danger we just can not handle any more vehicles on the few roads we have in and out of our area. Please vote to keep our area and the people safe. Thankyou. Sincerely, Linda Schryver Anaheim 92808 Yahoo Mail: Search, Organize, Conquer From: Alli Valdivia Sent: Monday, June 22, 2026 4:14 PM To: Christine Nguyen Subject: [EXTERNAL] Prohousing Designation [You don't often get email from Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderidentification ] 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. Mayor and Members of the Anaheim City Council, I understand the city is considering submitting for Prohousing designation. Please take the necessary time to review the parameters of this designation carefully. California's Prohousing Designation Program (https://www.hcd.ca.gov/planning-and-research/prohousing) incentivizes local governments to streamline development. However, critics and policy experts highlight notable drawbacks: it can bypass vital local input and safety reviews, fails to directly force physical construction, and awards points for loosely related criteria that don't always accelerate housing supply. Here is a breakdown of the main criticisms: 1. Weak Direct Impact on Actual Housing The designation provides state funding preferences and priority processing, but it does not actually build units or force private developers to break ground. A policy analysis from the Terner Center notes that some jurisdictions struggle with market -rate labor and material costs, making the designation ineffective at truly boosting housing supply without deep subsidies. 2. Bypass of Community Input & Safety Reviews For many residents, particularly in hazard -prone areas like Anaheim Hills,the biggest negative is that "prohousing" policies often force cities to fast -track dense development in zones facing severe wildfire risks or traffic bottlenecks. Critics argue these top -down state pushes disregard vital resident feedback and community -specific safety constraints. 3. Flawed Point and Scoring Systems The California Department of Housing and Community Development scores jurisdictions across various policy categories to grant the status. However, the Terner Center's evaluation concluded that several qualifying criteria (such as adopting universal design ordinances, reducing alternative transportation barriers, or counting ADU policies twice) do not explicitly or directly increase a city's housing production. 4. Financial Strain on Municipal Budgets Some local municipalities and advocacy groups have pushed back because adding large volumes of rental housing or affordable units doesn't inherently expand a city's local property tax base. Because new residential units bring increased infrastructural demands (schools, roads, utilities) but generate less revenue, existing homeowners often worry they will shoulder the burden of rising municipal expenses down the road. I respectfully ask the City to explain why it would pursue California's Prohousing Designation when significant concerns about traffic, parking, infrastructure, and evacuation safety remain unresolved. This is not a question of whether Anaheim should build housing. It is a question of why the City would encourage even greater density before demonstrating that our roads, infrastructure, and emergency evacuation systems can safely support the growth already approved. The City has already prepared studies, but independent CEQA counsel identified serious deficiencies in the City's own analyses, including inconsistencies with Anaheim's adopted evacuation plans and failures to adequately account for cumulative impacts. Even more concerning, the City Council, City staff, and the Fire Chief previously concluded that additional density on these same roadways would increase evacuation risks and threaten public safety. East Anaheim and Anaheim Hills are located in a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone, where evacuation is a matter of life and death. Residents have already experienced the realities of wildfire and gridlock. Seeking Prohousing Designation and state funding to encourage even greater density while these unresolved safety risks remain is irresponsible. Public safety must come before development incentives. Anaheim should not be seeking state incentives to encourage additional density when it has yet to demonstrate that the growth already approved can be safely accommodated. Please do not submit for this designation, retain your power and support your constituents. Respectfully Anahim Resident Allilson Valdivia From: Frank Lansner Sent: Sunday, June 21, 2026 9:44 PM To: Christine Nguyen Subject: [EXTERNAL] Prohousing Designation You don't often get email from Learn why this is important 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. Mayor and Members of the Anaheim City Council I am writing to express serious concerns regarding any effort by the City of Anaheim to pursue California's Prohousing Designation and the policies that typically accompany such a designation. While Anaheim has long supported housing development and continues to approve significant residential projects throughout the city, many of your constituents question why our City leaders would further commit our city and its residents to a state dictated framework that prioritizes housing production above other critical community considerations such as traffic, parking, infrastructure , public safety, and quality of life. Anaheim has already demonstrated substantial housing production. If the City is meeting or exceeding its housing obligations, residents deserve a clear explanation of why additional Prohousing commitments are necessary and what public benefits justify the potential loss of local planning flexibility. Citywide Concerns Across Anaheim: residents are experiencing the consequences of policies that encourage higher density while reducing traditional development standards. One of the most visible impacts is parking. State and local policies increasingly support reductions in parking requirements based on assumptions about traffic use and changing transportation habits. The reality experienced by residents is very different. Families continue to own vehicles, visitors require parking, and many neighborhoods already face significant parking shortages. Overflow parking spills into surrounding residential streets, creating frustration and conflict among neighbors. Traffic congestion has similarly worsened throughout our City. Residents routinely encounter longer travel times, increased cut - through traffic, and growing strain on roadways that were not designed to accommodate continued population growth without corresponding infrastructure improvements. Many residents feel that planning decisions are increasingly driven by housing production targets rather than balanced consideration of all community needs. East Anaheim and Anaheim Hills: These concerns are magnified in East Anaheim, where geography, wildfire risk, and limited evacuation routes create unique public safety challenges. Residents are particularly concerned that projects are evaluated independently while the real -world impacts are cumulative. The proposed Deer Canyon development, the approved 447-unit Festival Center apartment project, future Housing Element sites, accessory dwelling units, and other anticipated development all add residents, vehicles, and evacuation demand to the same constrained transportation network. Yet each project is typically analyzed as a standalone proposal. Residents do not experience these projects individually. They experience them collectively. The critical question is not whether one project can be accommodated in isolation. The question is whether the entire Santa Ana Canyon corridor can safely accommodate the cumulative population growth that results from all approved, proposed, and anticipated projects combined. This concern is particularly important in areas affected by wildfire hazards. During a major wildfire event, residents will have only a limited number of evacuation routes available. Existing congestion already affects Santa Ana Canyon Road and surrounding corridors during ordinary daily conditions. Safe and timely evacuation under conditions similar to the Palisades or Altadena fires is at high risk under current density conditions. Lives are at risk now. Residents have legitimate concerns regarding what evacuation conditions would look like after full build -out of multiple high density I residential projects. Prohousing and Local Control: Many residents view Prohousing designation as a signal that the City intends to further reduce barriers to development through measures such as reduced parking requirements, increased density allowances, streamlined approvals, and diminished opportunities for community input. While these policies may be promoted as tools to increase housing production, they can also weaken the City's ability to address neighborhood -specific concerns and respond to infrastructure limitations. Residents deserve assurance that Anaheim's planning decisions will continue to prioritize public safety, infrastructure capacity, traffic management, and neighborhood livability -not a prohousing designation, short-sighted and motivated by grant monies. REQUEST: Before pursuing Prohousing designation or adopting additional policies intended to accelerate residential development, I respectfully request that the City: • Conduct a comprehensive cumulative impact analysis of approved, pending, and anticipated residential projects. • Evaluate cumulative traffic and evacuation impacts throughout East Anaheim and Anaheim Hills. • Demonstrate consistency with Anaheim's adopted Safety Element and wildfire planning policies. • Assess the citywide impacts of reduced parking requirements on existing neighborhoods. • Provide residents with meaningful opportunities to participate in decisions that will permanently serve Anaheim's future. Anaheim's responsibility is not merely to approve housing. It is to balance housing with public safety, infrastructure capacity, mobility, environmental constraints, and the quality of life of existing residents. We urge the City to reject any Prohousing policies that prioritize development incentives over these equally important responsibilities. "The issue before us is not whether Anaheim should build housing. The issue is whether Anaheim should continue increasing density without first proving that our roads, parking supply, infrastructure, and evacuation systems can safely support the cumulative growth that has already been approved." Respectfully, Frank Lansner From: Tannis Soto Sent: Monday, June 22, 2026 11:28 AM To: Christine Nguyen Subject: [EXTERNAL] Proposed Prohousing Designation in Anaheim You don't often get email fro Learn why this is important 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. Dear Christine Nguyen, I first heard the City of Anaheim is currently considering obtaining a Prohousing Designation by the State of California last week. I am concerned about what the ramifications are if the City of Anaheim were to obtain such a designation. While I am all for making housing more affordable in Anaheim, I am extremely concerned if by agreeing to such a designation Anaheim would be giving up authority to the state that should stay local. I have read a list of the benefits of such a designation I am concerned about requirements that may force additional housing in areas that are high fire areas. I am a resident of Anaheim Hills and believe that any additional housing in certain areas of Anaheim Hills needs to be prefaced by taking steps to ensure that there is sufficient infrastructure and access and egress to allow for safe evacuation in the event of fire. Currently the infratucture and access and egress is sorely lacking. In addition, I believe that there should be more education/information provided to the public on this topic before anything is decided. Thank you for your consideration. Peace, Tannis Dunbar -Soto Resident of Anaheim From: Sent: Monday, June 22, 2026 9:32 AM To: Christine Nguyen Subject: [EXTERNAL] publiccomment@anaheim.net Attachments: Letter in opposition to ProHousing designation MLT.pdf You don't often get email from Learn why this is important 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. June 22, 2026 Mayor and Council Members, I am a resident of Anaheim I am asking the City leadership to consider why you would pursue California's Prohousing Designation to essentially abdicate your responsibility to protect the citizens of east Anaheim and Anaheim hills. Critical issues related to traffic, evacuation, and infrastructure remain unresolved and engaging in further development in highly congested areas with very minimal evacuation routes is irresponsible government. Proposed developments falling under this Prohousing designation include senior housing for some of our most vulnerable adults. While Anaheim Hills has numerous senior housing options, the addition of more high -density housing in areas without appropriate safety infrastructure is a recipe for tragedy when the next wildfire hits our community. As a medical professional working in a large hospital in LA I am all too aware of the challenges faced by communities trying to evacuate their most vulnerable populations. Often they become the last priority, and these tragedies will be your ultimate responsibility. This is not opposition to housing. This is opposition to pursuing incentives for greater density before demonstrating that our roads and emergency systems can safely handle the growth already approved. The facts are very clear and serious. An independent CEQA analysis identified significant deficiencies in the City's own review — including inconsistencies with Anaheim's adopted evacuation plans and failure to account for cumulative impacts. The City Council, City staff, and the Fire Chief have all previously concluded that additional density on these narrow roads would increase evacuation risk and threaten lives. East Anaheim and Anaheim Hills are already a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone. Residents here have lived through wildfire and gridlock. Evacuation is not a planning abstraction — it is a matter of life and death. Please do not abdicate your responsibility to the safety of all of your constituents in Anaheim. Seeking state funding to encourage more density before these safety failures are resolved is irresponsible. Public safety must come before development incentives. Anaheim should not be pursuing Prohousing Designation until it can demonstrate that the growth already approved can be safely accommodated. Please find attached a hard copy version of this message. Sincerely, Dr. Mary L, Thompson Anaheim Hills resident June 22, 2026 Mayor and Council Members, I am a resident of Anaheim I am asking the City leadership to consider why you would pursue California's Prohousing Designation to essentially abdicate your responsibility to protect the citizens of east Anaheim and Anaheim hills. Critical issues related to traffic, evacuation, and infrastructure remain unresolved and engaging in further development in highly congested areas with very minimal evacuation routes is irresponsible government. Proposed developments falling under this Prohousing designation include senior housing for some of our most vulnerable adults. While Anaheim Hills has numerous senior housing options, the addition of more high -density housing in areas without appropriate safety infrastructure is a recipe for tragedy when the next wildfire hits our community. As a medical professional working in a large hospital in LA I am all too aware of the challenges faced by communities trying to evacuate their most vulnerable populations. Often they become the last priority, and these tragedies will be your ultimate responsibility. This is not opposition to housing. This is opposition to pursuing incentives for greater density before demonstrating that our roads and emergency systems can safely handle the growth already approved. The facts are very clear and serious. An independent CEQA analysis identified significant deficiencies in the City's own review including inconsistencies with Anaheim's adopted evacuation plans and failure to account for cumulative impacts. The City Council, City staff, and the Fire Chief have all previously concluded that additional density on these narrow roads would increase evacuation risk and threaten lives. East Anaheim and Anaheim Hills are already a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone. Residents here have lived through wildfire and gridlock. Evacuation is not a planning abstraction it is a matter of life and death. Please do not abdicate your responsibility to the safety of all of your constituents in Anaheim. Seeking state funding to encourage more density before these safety failures are resolved is irresponsible. Public safety must come before development incentives. Anaheim should not be pursuing Prohousing Designation until it can demonstrate that the growth already approved can be safely accommodated. Sincerely, Der.. Mary LL, Thompson Ana im Hills res dent From: Bill Erickson Sent: Monday, June 22, 2026 4:43 PM To: Christine Nguyen Subject: [EXTERNAL] regarding the City Council voting on a Prohousing designation. You don't often get email from Learn why this is important 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. Dear Mayor, and City Council Members: My name is Bill Erickson. My wife and I live at —in the Mohler Loop area of Anaheim Hills. This area is designated to allow lot sizes of one half acres and larger. We moved here from a tract size lot in Placentia in 1979, because we wanted a "country feel", and less housing density. We bought a seven tenths acre lot on Owens Drive. We built our "Dream Home" in 1979. We almost lost our home in October 1982 when there as a massive wildfire in Deer Canyon (YES: THAT DEER CANYON) which is about 500 feet East of our home, Thank you City of Anaheim for periodically hiring goats to clear the brush in the canyon! Since then there have been several wildfires in the area! There is only one way out of the Mohler Loop, which is down Mohler Drive to Santa Ana Canyon Road. We are TRAPPED in here. To further aggravate the problem, when we get to Santa Ana Canyon Road we can only go East to Weir Canyon Road OR West to Imperial Highway. On weekdays, especially Fridays, Santa Ana Canyon Road is JAMMED with cars, especially east bound. The City's "Find Your Way" is a JOKE! It is WORTHLESS! When we bought our lot in 1978 1 noted that there was a dirt ramp extending North from the Fairmont and Santa Ana Canyon intersection that was obviously intended to lead up to a bridge over the 91 Fwy. WHY HAS THAT NOT BEEN BUILT IN THE LAST 48 YEARS? This would add a third escape route for YOUR residents. I was APPALLED when the City Council approved the 447 unit Festival Center apartment Project. The last thing we need is more high density housing, with the associated additional cars trying to evacuate in the next firestorm! The city of Anaheim is currently at 159 % of their build out expectations for the current time period for the city, including district 6. WHY TAKE A BEAUTIFUL SCENIC AREA AND RUIN IT WITH HIGH DENSITY HOUSING? Mayor and Members of the Anaheim City Council, I am writing to express serious concerns regarding any effort by the City of Anaheim to pursue California's Prohousing Designation and the policies that 1 typically accompany such a designation. While Anaheim has long supported housing development and continues to approve significant residential projects throughout the city, many residents question why The City would further commit itself to a framework that prioritizes housing production above other critical community considerations such as traffic, parking, infrastructure , PUBLIC SAFETY, and quality of Iife.Anaheim has already demonstrated substantial housing production. If the City is meeting or exceeding its housing obligations, residents deserve a clear explanation of why additional Prohousing commitments are necessary and what public benefits justify the potential loss of local planning flexibility. The issue before us is not whether Anaheim should build housing. The issue is whether Anaheim should continue increasing density without first proving that our roads, parking supply, infrastructure, and EVACUATION SYSTEMS can safely support the cumulative growth that has already been approved. Respectfully, Bill Erickson Anaheim 92808 From: Herm Rittner Sent: Monday, June 22, 2026 5:33 PM To: Christine Nguyen Subject: [EXTERNAL] Regarding the City Council voting on a Prohousing designation. You don't often get email from Learn why this is important 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. Dear Mayor, and City Council Members: My name is Herm Rittner My wife and I live at in the Mohler Loop area of Anaheim Hills. This area is designated to allow lot sizes of one half acres and larger. We moved here from a tract size lot in Huntington Beach in 1982, because we wanted a "country feel", and less housing density. We bought a .5 acre lot on Owens Drive. We built our "Dream Home" in 1982.We almost lost our home in October 1982 when there as a massive wildfire in Deer Canyon. YES: THAT DEER CANYON) which is about 500 feet East of our home, Thank you City of Anaheim for periodically hiring goats to clear the brush in the canyon! Since then there have been several wildfires in the area! There is only one way out of the Mohler Loop, which is down Mohler Drive to Santa Ana Canyon Road. We are TRAPPED in here. To further aggravate the problem, when we get to Santa Ana Canyon Road we can only go East to Weir Canyon Road OR West to Imperial Highway. On weekdays, especially Fridays, Santa Ana Canyon Road is JAMMED with cars, especially east bound. The City's "Find Your Way" is a JOKE! It is WORTHLESS! When we bought our lot in 1978 1 noted that there was a dirt ramp extending North from the Fairmont and Santa Ana Canyon intersection that was obviously intended to lead up to a bridge over the 91 FwyWHY HAS THAT NOT BEEN BUILT IN THE LAST 48 YEARS? This would add a third escape route for YOUR residents. I was APPALLED when the City Council approved the 447 unit Festival Center apartment Project. The last thing we need is more high density housing, with the associated additional cars trying to evacuate in the next firestorm! The city of Anaheim is currently at 159% of their build out expectations for the current time period for the city, including district 6. WHY TAKE A BEAUTIFUL SCENIC AREA AND RUIN IT WITH HIGH DENSITY HOUSING? Mayor and Members of the Anaheim City Council, I am writing to express serious concerns regarding any effort by the City of Anaheim to pursue California's Prohousing Designation and the policies that typically accompany such a designation. While Anaheim has long supported housing development and continues to approve significant residential projects throughout the city, many residents question why The City would further commit itself to a framework that prioritizes housing production above other critical community considerations such as traffic, parking, infrastructure , PUBLIC SAFETY, and quality of life.Anaheim has already demonstrated substantial housing production. If the City is meeting or exceeding its housing obligations, residents deserve a clear explanation of why additional Prohousing commitments are necessary and what public benefits justifythe potential loss of local planning flexibility. The issue before us is not whether Anaheim should build housing. The issue is whether Anaheim should continue increasing density without first proving that our roads, parking supply, infrastructure, and EVACUATION SYSTEMS can safely support the cumulative growth that has already been approved. Respectfully, Hermann Rittner naheim 92808 From: Sent: Monday, June 22, 2026 7:19 PM To: Christine Nguyen Subject: [EXTERNAL] Save Anaheim Hills [You don't often get email from Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderidentification ] 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. Hello, I bought my house in Anaheim Hills back in 1993. 1 was so thrilled to be able to afford a home here especially since I was a single mom Living here, I always felt safe and comfortable. But as the years went by, I noticed that this area is more congested and the traffic is getting worse. I believe in progress but not if it jeopardizes the safety of the residents living here in this area. It is a tragedy waiting to happen whenever there's a fire and the Santa Ana winds flare up. Knowing that there's a push to build so many new housings really frightens me because that means the safety of this neighborhood is being disregarded and the residents' voices need to be heard. Please represent our voices and stop this expansion of new housings. Sincerely, Rebecca Candelaria Sent from my iPhone From: Gerald Ohta Sent: Monday, June 22, 2026 11:11 AM To: Christine Nguyen Subject: [EXTERNAL] Traffic congestion at Serrano and Weir Cyn Road [You don't often get email from Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderidentification ] 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. Sent from my iPhone Every year the congestion get worse and worse. The problem is that there is so much traffic going down from Serrano that ties up the intersection and the problem gets worse at Weir Canyon and Santa Ana Cyn Rd From: Linda Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2026 2:55 PM To: Christine Nguyen; Public Comment Subject: [EXTERNAL] Anaheim Hills, No to California's Prohousing Designation You don't often get email from Learn why this is important 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. I highly concerned and respectfully ask the City to explain why it would pursue California's Prohousing Designation when significant concerns with CURRENT daily impact to the residents today regarding traffic, parking, infrastructure, and evacuation safety remain unresolved. This is not a question of whether Anaheim should build housing. It is a question of why the City would encourage even greater density before demonstrating that our roads, infrastructure, and emergency evacuation systems can safely support the growth already approved. The City has already prepared studies, but independent CEQA counsel identified serious deficiencies in the City's own analyses, including inconsistencies with Anaheim's adopted evacuation plans and failures to adequately account for cumulative impacts. Even more concerning, the City Council, City staff, and the Fire Chief previously concluded that additional density on these same roadways would increase evacuation risks and threaten public safety. East Anaheim and Anaheim Hills are located in a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone, where evacuation is a matter of life and death. Residents have already experienced the realities of wildfire and gridlock. Seeking Prohousing Designation and state funding to encourage even greater density while these unresolved safety risks remain is irresponsible. Public safety must come before development incentives. Anaheim should not be seeking state incentives to encourage additional density when it has yet to demonstrate that the growth already approved can be safely accommodated. Seeking to build additional housing in a known wildfire area with recent wildfire home losses and daily infrastructure problems creating traffic issues bad enough that we cannot conduct daily activity is irresponsible. As well, East Anaheim homeowners are being cancelled by insurance carriers who acknowledge the dangerous conditions but leave existing homeowners who are both tax payers and constituents with no choices for insurance on their homes. Please do the right thing for East Anaheim. We are ALL your constituents and your neighbors. Please stop dividing us from Anaheim and respect and hear our legitimate concerns for our safety based on wildfires and traffic problems that have and are impacting our community. Respectfully, Name Linda Loveng Anaheim CA From: Concerned Anaheim Residents Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2026 3:46 PM To: Christine Nguyen; Public Comment; City Clerk Cc: Robert Fabela; Gregory Garcia; prohousingpolicies@hcd.ca.gov; compliancereview@hcd.ca.gov; whistleblower@auditor.ca.gov; info@firstamendmentcoalition.org; norberto@voiceofoc.org Subject: [EXTERNAL] URGENT NOTICE: Re -Submission of Formal Opposition to Anaheim Pro - Housing (PDP) Application (Original Transmission: 6/11/26) You don't often get email from Learn why this is important 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. To Christine Nguyen, the Anaheim City Clerk, Members of the Anaheim City Council, and the State HCD Review Board: The Concerned Anaheim Residents coalition is re -submitting this formal written comment, originally transmitted on 6-11-26, before the 5:00 p.m. public deadline to state our strict opposition to the City of Anaheim's California Pro -Housing Designation Program (PDP) application. Due to lack of confirmation of our previous correspondence, this email is being re -submitted to ensure that it is included in the list of public comments received for the HCD Review Board. We demand that the state deny Anaheim's self -certified sixty-one (61) local transparency points. Under the oversight of City Attorney Robert Fabela, the city is maintaining an active, server -wide public records blackout to shield special interests, directly violating state grant requirements. We enter our formal opposition onto the permanent public and state record based on the following material merits: 1. Active CPRA Statutory Default & Deficient Responses: As of May 22, 2026, the city entered a documented state of statutory non-compliance and systematic determination delinquency per California Public Records Act (CPRA) guidelines. The administration has actively suppressed raw backend lobbyist portal metadata logs and intentionally misfiled urgent 24- hour statutory Delinquency Notices into standard slow queues to run out public clocks. 2. Systemic Lobbyist Disclosure Fraud & Shadow Lobbying: A completed registry audit of Curt Pringle & Associates (2023-2026) exposes a coordinated pattern of wide -scale, retroactive quarterly disclosure modifications executed right alongside major Planning Commission and City Council vote dates. Furthermore, visual evidence captures unregistered shadow lobbyists operating inside council chambers to manipulate project outcomes, utilizing unrecorded back - channel access to sitting Councilmembers. 3. Calendar Omissions & Shielding of Unsubmitted Pipelines: The city is utilizing this records default to advance multiple unsubmitted, adjacent high -density land -use pipelines under total zero -disclosure thresholds. Official municipal public calendars maintain "flat -zero" disclosures and flat -zero listed developer meetings, actively erasing and failing to record developer coordination sessions even while physical project signage is being actively installed on -site in the community. 4. Muzzling Public Participation (Pre-empting the "Modernization" Defense): To insulate city executives from public scrutiny regarding these hidden developments, the City Council voted on May 12, 2026, to codify restrictive new meeting rules. Regardless of whether these rules are actively enforced at every session, the mere codification of a discretionary 1-minute speech cap and a 90-minute meeting cutoff creates an immediate structural barrier and a documented chilling effect on civic participation. By vesting the power to arbitrarily muzzle resident testimony into the subtext of city policy, the council has built a legal mechanism designed to restrict evidence -heavy oversight. Under state HCD guidelines, it is the structural existence of these restrictive barriers, not the city's promises of benevolence, that violates the threshold requirements for open community engagement and state AFFH mandates. 1. Dais Collusion & Evidence Suppression: Time -stamped visual data captures a synchronized pattern of sitting Councilmembers utilizing devices behind the dais immediately adjacent to developer lobbying team communications during active, live project deliberations. To shield this back -channel collusion from public review, the city has actively suppressed public records requests for the corresponding backend communication metadata logs and has failed to produce the public hall camera footage capturing these sequences. 2. Audit of Open, Suppressed, and Deficient Datasets: The city currently maintains an extensive backlog of unanswered or deficient Public Records Act (PRA) requests across multiple districts, systematically shielding municipal and developer liability. This includes: Stonewalled PRAs Concealing Municipal & Lobbyist Misconduct: The city has gone completely radio silent on outstanding PRA requests regarding city official and lobbyist conduct for the Anaheim Hills Festival Development Project Approval (DEV2023- 00043); deliberately withholding records that substantiate allegations of shadow lobbying, unregistered influence, and altered disclosure timelines. Procedural Deficiencies and Due Process Evasion: Municipal administration failed to acknowledge multiple formal delinquency notices, omitted critical evidence submissions, and ignored a valid Brown Act Cure & Correct demand. This includes an entirely inadequate administrative review of the project's appeal, where the city restricted public opposition to a token 10-page response against an 870-page structural appeal packet. Open, deficient PRAs regarding local neighborhood water contamination metrics. • Suppressed City Council administrative records, unredacted internal communications, and deliberately unrecorded or altered lobbyist disclosure timelines. Withholding critical investigative files and body -worn camera footage from the grieving family of Albert Arzola. A municipality cannot legally pocket millions in state infrastructure funds under the guise of "local transparency" while actively operating a state of records default on its own servers to muzzle its residents and shield developer liabilities. We request that the HCD Review Board place an immediate administrative hold on Anaheim's designation. The itemized evidentiary files, including time -stamped visual data of unregistered shadow lobbying and metadata audit logs, are currently being finalized for investigative integrity and will be transmitted directly to the HCD Review Board and state enforcement agencies under separate cover. Please immediately confirm receipt of this message. Any failure by the City to acknowledge and log this formal opposition will be reported directly to the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) as a structural failure of local transparency and a deliberate attempt to obscure public opposition to the Pro -Housing Designation Program (PDP Funding). Respectfully submitted, The Stakeholder Audit Team ------- Forwarded message --------- From: Concerned Anaheim Residents Date: Thu, Jun 11, 2026 at 3:29 PM Subject: Formal OPPOSITION & Public Comment: California Pro -Housing Designation Program (PDP) Application - Material Transparency Defaults To: <publiccomment0banaheim.net>, <cnguyen2 anaheim.net> Cc:<ProhousingPolicies(ahcd.ca.gov>,<prohousingincentive(a)hcd.ca.gov> To Christine Nguyen, the Anaheim City Clerk, Members of the Anaheim City Council, and the State HCD Review Board: The Concerned Anaheim Residents coalition is submitting this formal written comment ahead of today's 5:00 p.m. public deadline to state our strict opposition to the City of Anaheim's California Pro -Housing Designation Program (PDP) application. We demand that the state deny Anaheim's self -certified sixty-one (61) local transparency points. Under the oversight of City Attorney Robert Fabela, the city is maintaining an active, server -wide public records blackout to shield special interests, directly violating state grant requirements. We enter our formal opposition onto the permanent public and state record based on the following material merits: 1. Active CPRA Statutory Default & Deficient Responses: As of May 22, 2026, the city entered an unconditional state of Statutory Default under the California Public Records Act (CPRA). The administration has actively suppressed raw backend lobbyist portal metadata logs and intentionally misfiled urgent 24-hour statutory Delinquency Notices into standard slow queues to run out public clocks. 2. Systemic Lobbyist Disclosure Fraud & Shadow Lobbying: A completed registry audit of Curt Pringle & Associates (2023-2026) exposes a coordinated pattern of wide -scale, retroactive quarterly disclosure modifications executed right alongside major Planning Commission and City Council vote dates. Furthermore, visual evidence captures unregistered shadow lobbyists operating inside council chambers to manipulate project outcomes, utilizing unrecorded back - channel access to sitting Councilmembers. 3. Calendar Omissions & Shielding of Unsubmitted Pipelines: The city is utilizing this records default to advance multiple unsubmitted, adjacent high -density land -use pipelines under total zero -disclosure thresholds. Official municipal public calendars maintain "flat -zero" disclosures and flat -zero listed developer meetings, actively erasing and failing to record developer coordination sessions even while physical project signage is being actively installed on -site in the community. 4. Muzzling Public Participation (Pre-empting the "Modernization" Defense): To insulate city executives from public scrutiny regarding these hidden developments, the City Council voted on May 12, 2026, to codify restrictive new meeting rules. Regardless of whether these rules are actively enforced at every session, the mere codification of a discretionary 1-minute speech cap and a 90-minute meeting cutoff creates an immediate structural barrier and a documented chilling effect on civic participation. By vesting the power to arbitrarily muzzle resident testimony into the subtext of city policy, the council has built a legal mechanism designed to restrict evidence -heavy oversight. Under state HCD guidelines, it is the structural existence of these restrictive barriers, not the city's promises of benevolence, that violates the threshold requirements for open community engagement. 1. Dais Collusion & Evidence Suppression: Time -stamped visual data captures a synchronized pattern of sitting Councilmembers utilizing devices behind the dais immediately adjacent to developer lobbying team communications during active, live project deliberations. To shield this back -channel collusion from public review, the city has actively suppressed public records requests for the corresponding backend communication metadata logs and has failed to produce the public hall camera footage capturing these sequences. 2. Audit of Open, Suppressed, and Deficient Datasets: The city currently maintains an extensive backlog of unanswered or deficient Public Records Act (PRA) requests across multiple districts, systematically shielding municipal and developer liability. This includes: Stonewalled PRAs Concealing Municipal & Lobbyist Misconduct: The city has gone completely radio silent on outstanding PRA requests regarding city official and lobbyist conduct for the Anaheim Hills Festival Development Project Approval (DEV2023- 00043); deliberately withholding records that substantiate allegations of shadow lobbying, unregistered influence, and altered disclosure timelines. Procedural Deficiencies and Due Process Evasion: Municipal administration failed to acknowledge multiple formal delinquency notices, omitted critical evidence submissions, and ignored a valid Brown Act Cure & Correct demand. This includes an entirely inadequate administrative review of the project's appeal, where the city restricted public opposition to a token 10-page response against an 870-page structural appeal packet. Open, deficient PRAs regarding local neighborhood water contamination metrics. Suppressed City Council administrative records, unredacted internal communications, and deliberately unrecorded or altered lobbyist disclosure timelines. Withholding critical investigative files and body -worn camera footage from the grieving family of Albert Arzola. A municipality cannot legally pocket millions in state infrastructure funds under the guise of "local transparency" while actively operating a state of records default on its own servers to muzzle its residents and shield developer liabilities. We request that the HCD Review Board place an immediate administrative hold on Anaheim's designation. The full, itemized evidentiary files, including time -stamped visual data of unregistered shadow lobbyists and metadata audit logs, are being transmitted directly to the HCD Review Board and state enforcement agencies under separate cover to preserve investigative integrity. Respectfully submitted, The Stakeholder Audit Team I'm highly concerned. I respectfully ask the City to explain why it would pursue California's Prohousing Designation when significant concerns with CURRENT daily impact to the residents today regarding traffic, parking, infrastructure, and evacuation safety remain unresolved. This is not a question of whetherAnaheim should build housing. It is a question of why the City would encourage even greater densit before demonstrating that our roads, infrastructure, and emergency evacuation systems can safely support the growth already approved. The City has already prepared studies, but independent CEQA counsel identified serious deficiencies in the City's own analyses, including inconsistencies with Anaheim's adopted evacuation plans and failures to adequately account for cumulative impacts. Even more concerning, the City Council, City staff, and the Fire Chief previously concluded that additional density on these same roadways would increase evacuation risks and threaten public safety. East Anaheim and Anaheim Hills are Located in a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone, where evacuation is a matter of Life and death. Residents have already experienced the realities of wildfire and gridlock. Seeking Prohousing Designation and state funding to encourage even greater density while these unresolved safety risks remain is irresponsible. Public safety must come before development incentives. Anaheim should not be seeking state incentives to encourage additional density when it has yet to demonstrate that the growth already approved can be safely accommodated. Seeking to build additional housing in a known wildfire area with recent wildfire home Losses and daily infrastructure problems creating traffic issues bad enough that we cannot conduct daily activity is irresponsible. As well, East Anaheim homeowners are being cancelled by insurance carriers who acknowledge the dangerous conditions but Leave existing homeowners who are both tax payers and constituents with no choices for insurance on their homes. Please do the right thing for East Anaheim. We are ALL your constituents and your neighbors. Please stop dividing us from Anaheim and respect and hear our Legitimate concerns for our safety based on wildfires and traffic problems that have and are impacting our community. Respectfully, Eric Loveng Anaheim CA 92808 From: Brenda Neel Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2026 8:05 PM To: Public Comment; cnguyen@anaheim.net Subject: [EXTERNAL] Prohousibg designation disaster You don't often get email from Learn why this is important 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. Mayor and Members of the Anaheim City Council, I respectfully ask the City to explain why it would pursue California's Prohousing Designation when significant concerns about traffic, parking, infrastructure, and evacuation safety remain unresolved and a grave threat the the residents of Anaheim Hills. This is not a question of whether Anaheim should build housing. It is a question of why the City would encourage even greater density before demonstrating that our roads, infrastructure, and emergency evacuation systems can safely support the growth already approved. The City has already prepared studies, but independent CEQA counsel identified serious deficiencies in the City's own analyses, including inconsistencies with Anaheim's adopted evacuation plans and failures to adequately account for cumulative impacts. These inconsistency's will knowingly put the residents in danger and potentially devastating or fatal outcomes. Even more concerning, the City Council, City staff, and the Fire Chief previously concluded that additional density on these same roadways would increase evacuation risks and threaten public safety. East Anaheim and Anaheim Hills are located in a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone, where evacuation is a matter of life and death. Residents have already experienced the realities of wildfire and gridlock. Seeking Prohousing Designation and state funding to encourage even greater density while these unresolved safety risks remain is irresponsible. Public safety must come before development incentives. Anaheim should not be seeking state incentives to encourage additional density when it has yet to demonstrate that the growth already approved can be safely accommodated. Respectfully, Brenda Neel Anaheim Hills resident Sent from Yahoo Mail for Phone Roberta J. Mancillas Anaheim, CA 92805 May 15, 2026 The City Clerk City of Anaheim P.O. Box 3222 Anaheim, CA 92803 Tb Whom It May Concern, ("E'V ED ' K 1, being a resident at the above listed address of - do hereby protest the proposed rate increases of the Solid Waste Fees proposed effective date of July 1, 2026. Respectfully, Roberta J. Mancillas Roberta J. Mancillas Anaheim, CA 92805 May 15, 2026 The City Clerk City of Anaheim PO. Box 3222 Anaheim, CA 92803 Tb Whom It May Concern, 1, being a resident at the above listed address of -do hereby protest the proposed rate increases of the Wastewater proposed effective date of July 1, 2026. Respectfully, Roberta J. Mancillas M § :b V I Z AV.W qZa, 0 3 A 13 0 3 cN-1 To whom it may concern: As the owner of Parcel Number: 267-121-20, I am writing to inform City of Anaheim and Anaheim Public Utilities I oppose the rate increases listed for public hearing scheduled on 23 Jun ` 9 E V E oppose the following increases of fees that fall under the following categories: Solid Waste Collection Monthly Fees 20 b MAY 21 A q* 53 Commercial Business Solid Waste and'Recycling Split Bin Monthly Fees Y }- -F_, CLERK Or Commercial Business Recycling CoIlection Monthly FeesNAHEIM Commercial Business Organic (Food and Yard Waste) Collection Monthly Fees. Wastewater Maintenance Monthly Fees Sincerely, Louis Nguyen Homeowner G J W13H", M313 S :b V L Z AIR 91Ot G3x 1 `) -:Jl of Anaheim /� PRSRT ST[ Box 3222 G [CC��`�` U.S. POSTAL sheim, CA 92803 PAID CITY OF ANAHEIM SANTA ANA, ,, —1 ' - - , .NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARIX �j : PERMIT NO.! � I� � M =f• "AE�T "Si.{i rs-(7iGtT 9?YsfiS 1 117757 / 7 i ?R i f ?i1 rZAH A RFCHLER TR (ln o [r�igis.. . .. vrt vvnr�r-ry r vuvvrnr r Pia BOX' 57 OR-ANGB CA 92855- 157 tetstltlitlttst"'!1l�ttt�ttlttl�ttlrtt!lt�l�tr!!�l11ltt!l���tlt! /'\o MIX m �v_ j Paper � FSC FSC° C010385� Proposed Fee Increase IMolid Waste and Wastewater Dates NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that on Tuesday, June 23, 2026, at 5 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard a public hearing to consider a proposed increase for solid waste fees and wastewater, with a proposed effective date of July 1 2026, will be held for all interested parties in the Council Chambers, City Hall, 200 S. Anaheim Blvd., Anaheim, CA 92805. PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENT California State Law requires the mailing of notices (no less than 45 days in advance of a hearing) of proposed increases for water, solid waste and wastewater rates/fees. EXPLANATION OF RATE INCREASES The City of Anaheim (the "City") levies monthly and bi-monthly fees for solid waste collection and disposal services provided to its customers. These fees reflect the cost of providing solid waste collection, disposal, recycling, and organics service to customers, including the cost of: (1) an annual CPI;adjustment to the City's waste hauler as required by the solid waste franchise agreement; (2) contractual payments to the City's waste hauler for collection, processing, transfer, and disposal services of refuse citywide; (3) tipping fees at the County of Orange owned and operated landfills and independently owned transfer stations; (4) collection and disposal of solid waste in City's right-of-way; (5) cost to implement and comply with State mandates, and (6) labor and administrative costs. i The City levies monthly and bi-monthly fees for wastewater collection and disposal services provided to its customers. These fees reflect the cost to the City for providing wastewater collection and disposal service to customers, including the cost of: (1) operations and maintenance; (2) inspection, repair, rehabilitation, and replacement of wastewater facilities to maintain compliance with the State Sewer Waste Discharge Requirements; (3) compliance with State stormwater regulations; (4) acquisition of appurtenant equipment, materials, and supplies; (5) labor and administrative costs; and (6) meeting ongoing debt as the matter may be heard. If mailed, they must be sent t( the City Clerk, P.O. Box 3222, Anaheim, CA 92803, or, i hand delivered: City Clerk, City Hall, 200 South Anahein Blvd., 2nd floor, Anaheim, CA 92805. Each written protes must identify the affected property (by ssessor's partie number or street address), indicate whether it is the so',ic waste and/or wastewater rate increase that is being protested and include the signature of the record property owner o tenant, as applicable. Protests received by telephone electronic mail (e-mail), or Anaheim Anytime will NOT b( accepted. All interested parties are invited to attend thf public, hearing, nt tten. ws_ and/or and/or oral comments on the proposed rate increases However, oral comments made at the public hearing will no qualify as a formal protest of the rate increases uules: accompanied by a written protest setting forth the require( information. If written protests are received from a majorit; of the affected parcels, the proposed rates will not N implemented. The City of Anaheim wishes to make all of its public meetings and hearings accessible to all members of th( public. If requested, the Notice and supporting materials wit. be made available in appropriate alternative formats tc persons with a disability, as required by Section 202 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. Sectior. 12132), and the Federal Rules and Regulations adopted it implementation thereof. Any person who requires disability -related modification or accommodation, including auxiliary aids or services, in order to participate in the public meeting may request such modification, accommodation. aid or service by contacting the Public Works Operations ant r https://service.secudan.com/cp/pay-as-a-guest/receipt 2/2 S S �b V Z - NAP Q01 G 3 A 1 --3 0 IN N {P 06/03/2026 To: City Of Anaheim '-CEIVED From: Ron Dumas Tu'1b "I - 9' 3q Anaheim, Ca. 92801 I am writing to you today to protest the Solid Waist Rate Increase with a proposed effective date of July 1, 2026. 1 am retired and it is difficult to live on a fixed SSI income. It is difficult to continue to pay increases as my income stays the same. Ron Dumas -- D V D .A' L lolb J N - # !� N Z Z A c� 3LG- V4 (14 (14 Yeordana Espinoza Anaheim, CA 92802 Date: May 10, 2026 City Clerk, City of Anaheim P.O. Box 3222 Anaheim, CA 92803 nvtUjkl is p` ci' 3 9 RE: Formal Written Protest Against Proposed Solid Waste and Wastewater Rate Increases (Hearing Date: June 23, 2026) Dear City Clerk, I am writing as a resident and tenant of the property located at in Anaheim. I am submitting this formal written protest against the proposed increases to the Solid Waste and Wastewater service rates scheduled for the public hearing on June 23, 2026. I live in a low-income apartment complex with more than 120 units. The proposed rate hike for large multi -family buildings is especially concerning to our community. For families living on limited resources, an increase of this scale is not a minor adjustment; it is a significant financial blow that impacts our ability to afford other basic necessities like food and medical care. As a resident of a large, low-income housing community, I urge the City Council to consider the financial strain this puts on the city's most vulnerable populations. I ask that you seek alternative solutions that do not involve such a heavy burden on those of us already struggling with the high cost of living in Orange County. Please ensure this protest is formally recorded and counted toward the majority protest proceedings as required by California law. Service Address: Account Number: - helm, CA 92802 EDGA 1490, LLC 1901 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 1100 Los Angeles, California 90067 TELEPHONE (310) 470-6380 FACSIMILE (310) 474-0470 May 14, 2026 City Clerk City of Anaheim PO Box 3222 Anaheim, CA 92803 E 108 MAY 19 A c� 4 2 Re: Protest of Proposed Solid Waste and Wastewater Rate Increase Property Address: 1440 S. Anaheim, Blvd., Anaheim, CA 92805 Parcel Number: 082-130-14 Gentlepersons, I.- Y OF AHAHEEN I hereby formally protest the proposed increases to the solid waste and wastewater rates scheduled for public hearing on June 23, 2026. The proposed increases appear excessive, particularly in light of the already substantial costs imposed on property owners and businesses. I respectfully request that the City reconsider the amount of the increases, provide greater justification and transparency regarding the underlying costs, and explore alternatives to reduce the burden on ratepayers. Please record this letter as a formal written protest for the affected property. Should you have any questions please contact me via email at les&lelaplc.com or telephone at (310) 470-6380. Very truly yours, EDGA 1490, LLC By: _ Name: Les E. Lederer Title: Manager c, /{ \ / 'In A YI7//=2 ` _�� \(\ � - Lederer -Anaheim, Ltd. 1901 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 1100 Los Angeles, California 90067 TELEPHONE (310) 470-6380 FACSIMILE (310) 474-0470 May 14, 2026 City Clerk City of Anaheim PO Box 3222 Anaheim, CA 92803 Re: Protest of Proposed Solid Waste and Wastewater Rate Increase Property Address: 1440 S. Anaheim, Blvd., Anaheim, CA 92805 Parcel Number: 082-130-16 Gentlepersons, N'CEIVED Z05 PAY 19 A 9- 41 I hereby formally protest the proposed increases to the solid waste and wastewater rates scheduled for public hearing on June 23, 2026. The proposed increases appear excessive, particularly in light of the already substantial costs imposed on property owners and businesses. I respectfully request that the City reconsider the amount of the increases, provide greater justification and transparency regarding the underlying costs, and explore alternatives to reduce the burden on ratepayers. Please record this letter as a formal written protest for the affected property. Should you have any questions please contact me via email at lesklelaplc.com or telephone at (310) 470-6380. Very truly yours, Lederer -Anaheim, Ltd., By: Equity Advisory Group, a California corporation, its General Partner By: Name: Les E. Lederer Title: President C7) \ 00 rq xi :b V b IZOI 71 V-1 cl C/I C, Ln UP CO� -r_ 1b: City Clerk June 11th, 2026 Hello, my name is Tuan Pham owner of the property located at Anaheim CA 92805. This letter is to protest the proposed fee increase for Solid Waste and Wastewater Rates. Thank you for your attention to this letter! r. rn Td = C/7-Y CLFRK Po Box 14WAA�IAI , ctq- 9a903 LU C+ Z L r rt—i11 III=lII—I11 E, III-311 III= I=III=III=III=III=11I=III=111=11k III=III=III=III=III=l11=III=111=1 11=III=III=15 F1'l=II-=I11=111=lII. =III=III=III=III=III=ill=III=III=1 II=111=III=III=III=III=lil=1lI=III= =III=III=III=III=III=III=iIi=III=1 �J=III_111=IlI=11l=III=III=III=III= `111=III=III=III= III =111=III=III=II 1=III=UI=III=1l1=III=111=M=111= III=III=III=III=III=III=III=III=11 1=III=III=111=III=III=III=ll1=III= III=IIl=111=1l1=III=EII-III=III=11 i.III=III=III=III=III=III=III=III= III=III=III=111=I1f=I11=III=III=11 1=III=III=III=III=111=If1=11l=III= III=III=11f=III=ill=III=III=II{=i; 1=III=III=III=III=III-II6=lII=lllc flI=III=III=III=III=III=11l=III=E1 I=III=III=III=III=IIl=111=III=!!I. III=III=III=1ll=III=ilk=llf=III=11 I=1l1=III=III=11l=III=III= EI1I=III=III=1il=III=11l=Ill=III=11 GII I=III=III =III=III=III =!! 1=III=11 II=III=III=III=III=lII=11f=III=III= �111=III-111=11i=III=11l=ill=111=11 11=III=III =Ill= III =III=IIi=III=III= tll1=III=III=III=111=III=lE1=(lf=11 11=III=III=111=III=111=111=III=iIi clll=lll=III=III=III=III=1!l=llf=fl ."'"...� 11=III=III=l11=III=III=III=III=11i= ,.. �111=III=III=III=111=III=III=III=1 11=III=lII.III=III=III=III=ill=III` III=III=III=l11=III=III=II1=lU=1! =III=III=III=111=111=III=111=1117 '�=11l=111=III=1{1=III=III=111- City Clerk City of Anaheim P.O. Box 3222 Anaheim, CA 92803 Subject: Formal Written Proiest of Proposed Solid Waste and Wastewater Rate Increases To Whom It May Concern: VT ff-ST-9 =TUN7�6r, 1=7711ST1110,1110030WA I hereby submit this formal written protest to the proposed increases in solid waste and wastewater rates scheduled for consideration on June 23, 2026. I oppose these rate increases -for the following reasons: I Affordability Concerns The proposed increases place an additional financial burden on residents who are already struggling with rising costs for housing, utilities, insurance, food, transportation, and healthcare. Many households have experienced little or no corresponding increase in income, making additional utility costs difficult to absorb. 2. Lack of Demonstrated Cost Control Before imposing higher rates on residents, the City should demonstrate that all reasonable cost -saving measures, operational efficiencies, contract reviews, and budget reductions have been thoroughly pursued. Ratepayers should not be expected to continually fund increasing expenses without evidence that every effort has been made to control costs. 3. Insufficient Transparency The notice provides general explanations for the proposed increases but does not clearly demonstrate why the increases are necessary, what alternatives were considered, what specific expenditures are driving the increases, or how the City intends to limit future increases. Residents deserve detailed financial justification before being asked to pay more. 4. Economic Impact on Families and Seniors Fixed -income residents, retirees, low-income households, and working families will be disproportionately affected. Utility services are essential and cannot easily be reduced or avoided, making these increases particularly burdensome. 5. Need for Alternative Solutions The City must explore alternative funding mechanisms, competitive contracting, efficiency improvements, reserve fund utilization where appropriate, phased implementation, and expenditure reductions before approving additional rate increases. For these reasons, I respeptfully request that the Anaheim City Council reject the proposed solid waste and wastewater rate increases and direct staff to identify cost -saving measures and alternative solutions that do not further burden residents. This letter constitutes my formal written protest pursuant to applicable California law. Respectfully submitted, Name: Rachel Pham b $ A, � T 0 0 Q, A a ;D Q 0 Q pD�, A, T Q Q Q54H-,+> 8Wgu 4A Z o a o 00�9 r�� w Q io O 2 a J O u Z n o+ O Co J �� d 2E >Q puY Ywj 'u^ Eo t V1aaZ Q ]�J ZJ 0 faaawa FSJY2�g V) 1, A41) 00 City of Anaheim ' P.O. Box 3222 Anaheim, CA 92803 (A -A\ t`'—d, «sj Zoe ['0 MIX papff FSC FSC- CO10385 PRSRT STD U.S. POSTAGE PAID CITY OF ANAHEIM - SANTA ANA, CA NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING I PERMIT NO.928 ...... ...... AUTO -ALL FOR AADC 928 1 130881 / 7 / 336 / 360 CHARITY ANNA EDMONTON OR CURRENT OCCUPANT PO BOX 854 ANAHEIM CA 92815-0854 N 11II1'I��I'I��IIIII��III III��1°�1111111°I�'�I'I�fMt�lll111� -C c-r9 C Pronosed Fee Increase for Solid Waste and Wastewater Rates` _..J T3 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that on Tuesday, June 23, 2026, at 5 p.m., or as soonfter a�ht a mattstay be heard, a public hearing to consider a proposed increase for solid waste fees and wastewater, with .1F*ropoWdleffective date of July 1, 2026, will be held for all interested parties in the Council Chambers, City Hall, 200 S. AnaTeim BM., Anaheim, CA 92805. PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENT California State Law requires the mailing of notices (no less than 45 days in advance of a hearing) of proposed increases for water, solid waste and wastewater rates/fees. EXPLANATION OF RATE INCREASES The City of Anaheim (the "City") levies monthly and bi-monthly fees for solid waste collection and disposal services provided to its customers. These fees reflect the cost of providing solid waste collection, disposal, recycling, and organics service to customers, including the cost of: (1) an annual CPI adjustment to the City's waste hauler as required by the solid :: rite franchise agreement; (2) contractual payments to the City's waste hauler for collection, processing, transfer, and disposal services of refuse citywide; (3) tipping fees at the County of Orange owned and operated landfills and independently owned transfer stations; (4) collection and disposal of solid waste in City's right-of-way; (5) cost to implement and comply with State mandates, and (6) labor and administrative costs. The City levies monthly and bi-monthly fees for wastewater collection and disposal services provided to its customers. These fees reflect the cost to the City for providing wastewater collection and disposal service to customers, including the cost of: (1) operations and maintenance; (2) inspection, repair, rehabilitation, and replacement of wastewater facilities to maintain compliance with the State Sewer Waste Discharge Requirements; (3) compliance with State stormwater regulations; (4) acquisition of appurtenant equipment, materials, and supplies; (5)?a"�or and administrative costs; and (6) meeting ongoing debt service obligations. Properly funded, the City will continue to improve the condition of the wastewater collection system, ensure that it will not have a negative impact on the environment, endanger wildlife, or pose a public health concern. The proposed Solid Waste Collection Fees and Wastewater Maintenance Fees for said services are on the reverse side of this Notice. PROTEST OF PROPOSED RATE INCREASES To protest the proposed rate increases, written protests must be received by the close of the public hearing, which is scheduled for June 23, 2026, at 5 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard. If mailed, they must be sent to the City Clerk, P.O. Box 3222, Anaheim, CA 92803, or, if hand delivered: City Clerk, City Hall, 200 South Anaheim Blvd., 2nd floor, Anaheim, CA 92805. Each written protest must identify the affected property (by assessor's parcel number or street address), indicate whether it is the solid waste and/or wastewater rate increase that is being protested, and include the signature of the record property owner or tenant, as applicable. Protests received by telephone, electronic mail (e-mail), or Anaheim Anytime will NOT be accepted. All interested parties are invited to attend the public hearing and present written protests and/or written and/or oral comments on the proposed rate increases. However, oral comments made at the public hearing will not qualify as a formal protest of the rate increases unless accompanied by a written protest setting forth the required information. If written protests are received from a majority of the affected parcels, the proposed rates will not be implemented. The City of Anaheim wishes to make all of its public meetings and hearings accessible to all members of the public. If requested, the Notice and supporting 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. Section 12132), and the Federal Rules and Regulations adopted in implementation thereof. Any person who requires a disability -related modification or accommodation, including auxiliary aids or services, in order to participate in the public meeting may request such modification, accommodation, aid or service by contacting the Public Works Operations and Maintenance Division either in person at 400 East Vermont Avenue, Anaheim, CA, or by telephone at 714-765-6883, no later than 10:00 a.m. on the day preceding the scheduled public hearing. If you have any questions regarding the proposed increases to solid waste rates or have questions on how to submit a written protest, please contact 714-765-6883. EN ESPANOL: Para recibir una copia de este documento en Espanol sobre la propuesta de incrementar las tarifas de la coleccion de basura o del mantenimiento de drenaje por favor llamenos al 714-765-6883. a a a a m � i' x• � g f g f f _2 _Z 2 2 2 2 - E 6m 9 JJ 9 9 9 d 9 a; n o '. cNn m v1°i T ((°tqO° fn ffqq qq v V N� � � [�•D d V E Co N _ m W ® N d 9 9 9 a !n N fA w Vi N {p c x V. c m � as om 03 Na - c a �z 3 3 3 3 3 w m m � m w a `� m �® N 3 3 a 3 a 3 iO N y iD � p KKKKKK o o s a a s A g _ ;33 - � 13 3 3 3 3 C p Cf m oa � N �aava� 3 3 a� N C C W W o Pf re f m d d m � d d Fe m K' w 3 3. 3. 3 79 A .Z tSi °1'p _885'8�' m'p b'S 85'8b_' m`p 88b'S'S'o m`p o 0 0 85'S o� N o' iL a� i N m N N N O R A N m 40 40�,(n R N 41 CA w N !A R N N N N O � m I z! w 9 N T N 3 �m 0�0-15 5 N N N N N 33 o y y p7 ,- o R z�� 3 3 w 7 o a � � 3 M foi y 0 0 V� O O IIS O� b o _ S A G O _ W m � 3 w H N � 6 2 5 5. 6 b o o to 0 0 m NC] O G�9 m C _ a I mam; A - - or PyQp _W 2 S . w gP w fA N ? ? m. ? cz-i G _ K 9 _ p r T n m N N 3 3 3 3 3 3 C G 3 3 3 3 3 W o A `r P. �. �. P. =Ia a m m m m m m n v nn n nn _W 0 0 0 0 o p A v �a 9 9 9 E co m ci = a a a o Q d a K E 15. N H J A a o A ?A- M. m \ 1 June 8,2026`` ED City Clerk ?I4 A 5U P.O. Box 3222 Anaheim, Ca 92803 'f CLEM RE: proposed increase for waste and water rates. As a long time Anaheim resident and property owner, I am writing this letter to simply request that in the determination of increases of yard bins that serious consideration is made for any increases. We are living with continual and high inflation over the last several years. I hope and pray that the people presenting these increases please consider the stresses of homeowners. I notice that standard bins are not being increased substantially, however, organic and commercial bins are higher. Please use serious consideration in allowing increases. Overtime, to the homeowner, renter and consumer, they truly add up. Please know that we do pay attention to your notices, and to the increases. Respectfully Submitted, Annetta Johnson Property Owner Cell: Home: Address: Victorville, Ca 92395 tA VI V, Q r Q LO N y C qlal U Marvin Flores City of Anaheim City Council 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. 17 Anaheim, CA 92805 RECEIVED Igo JUN t Z A q Subject: Opposition to Proposed Utility Fee Increases (Solid Waste and Wastewater) Dear Mayor and Members of the City Council, Li E I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed increases in utility fees, specifically those related to solid waste and wastewater services in the City of Anaheim. While I understand the City's responsibility to maintain infrastructure and provide reliable services, these proposed rate increases come at a time when many residents are already facing significant financial strain. The rising cost of housing, food, and other essentials has made it increasingly difficult for households to stay afloat, and additional increases in essential utility services will only add to that burden. Solid waste and wastewater services are fundamental to public health and daily living. Increasing these rates disproportionately affects working families, seniors on fixed incomes, and individuals who have little flexibility in managing these unavoidable expenses. Unlike discretionary spending, these costs cannot be reduced or avoided, making any increase particularly impactful. As a resident of Anaheim, I am also concerned about the broader ripple effects of these increases. Higher utility costs can place added pressure on property owners and small landlords, often Leading to higher housing costs for renters. In addition, small businesses —many of which are still navigating economic recovery —may struggle to absorb these added expenses, potentially impacting their ability to operate and serve the community. Transparency and community engagement are also essential. Residents deserve clear information about why these increases are necessary and how the additional revenue will be used to directly benefit the community. Anaheim is strongest when its residents are supported, not further strained. I ask that you carefully consider the real impact these increases will have and pursue solutions that are more equitable and sustainable for our community. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Marvin FL r ►1kay 2A I10Z- 6 t " C) Q: zz NInfl, Kol 03I ! AI�30 1---I c] M. lo ix LL 3 A 133 - "u 0 -. 01 0 Sp aw 06 N -k 60 cc Qn 0 � cD tj:,- I. l v/SH ro Hl 6; lY Al 92�vF, J e 4 t�6 A C-CC-ev T-1 y A107-IC r D u ,a 0" L O6= C / z y Alvo �'ce t3�-I N1 GIB t heA G; 2-® or )Auc.k costs 26-0 000 eGcc7`Ri r 4CK Z-� Vts,,e, E-A i1 'r W ol2lt G,S✓ rll�M So rNCk IVJ91/ - rO OQ r AIC, 141 4 CiC'�-C� la 0 AA s- IV 6�S t::-k.oM 're C t3ILZIA16 7-HeY 7-e Aim CIA/ L 1 '01 -Ni E 7 N'PtF qlol z ZIzN 0 cr- Z Zw d LL U L 1 :ai \1 E Z " gltl G3 A i�� 6/a 3�ao a.6 To The City of Anaheim, My wife and I own the property located at Anaheim, CA 92807. The parcel number is -. I am writing this letter to protest the proposed fee increase for solid waste and wastewater rates. I plead DO NOT increase the solid waste and wastewater rates! Sincerely, Brandon Rosenberg Roselle Rosenberg CJ d q W CD City of Anaheim P.O. Box 3222 Anaheim, CA 92803 CITY OF ANAHEIM NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING .... ­` .... ** ... *ECRWSS"C 019 142 92888 / 6 / 237 / 252 BRANDON M & ROSELLE M ECHENIQUE ROSENBERG OR CURRENT OCCUPANT ANAHEIM CA 92807-3953 InIII !!71!i'i�i'i­III iiill 11,111Id!!ii!°i!!!fills MIX Paper +I FSC FSC" C0103B5 j Proposed Fee Increase for Solid Waste and Wastewater Rates PRSRT STD U.S. POSTAGE PAID SANTA ANA, CA PERMIT NO.928 NOTICE IS HEREBY'GIVEN that on Tuesday, June 23, 2026, at 5 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter maybe heard, a public hearing to consider a proposed increase for solid waste fees and wastewater, with a proposed effective date of July 1, 2026; will be held for all interested paifiesrin the Council Chambers, City Hall, 200 S. Anaheim Blvd., Anaheim, CA 92805. PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENT California State Law requires the mailing of notices (no.less than 45 days in advance of a hearing) of proposed increases for water, solid waste and wastewater rates/fees. EXPLANATION OF RATE INCREASES The City of Anaheim (the "City")" levies monthly and bi-monthly fees for solid waste collection and disposal services provided to its customers. These fees reflect the cost of providing solid waste collection, disposal, recycling, and organics service to customers, including the cost of: (1) an annual CPI adjustment to the City's waste hauler as required by the solid waste franchise agreement; (2) contractual payments to the City's waste hauler for collection, processing, transfer, and disposal services of refuse citywide; (3) tipping fees at the County of Orange owned and operated landfills and independently owned transfer stations; (4) collection and disposal of solid waste in City's right-of-way; (5) cost to implement and comply with State mandates, and (6) labor and administrative costs. The City levies monthly and bi-monthly fees for wastewater collection and disposal services provided to its customers. These fees reflect the cost to the City for providing wastewater collection and disposal service to customers, including the cost of: (1) operations and maintenance; (2) inspection, repair, rehabilitation, and replacement of wastewater facilities to maintain compliance with the State Sewer Waste Discharge Requirements; (3) compliance with State stormwater regulations; (4) acquisition of appurtenant equipment, materials, and supplies; (5) labor and administrative costs; and (6) meeting ongoing debt service obligations. Properly funded, the City will continue to improve the condition of the wastewater collection system, ensure that it will not have a negative impact on the environment, endanger wildlife, or pose a public health concern. The proposed Solid Waste Collection Fees and Wastewater Maintenance Fees for said services are on the reverse side of this Notice. as the matter may be heard. If mailed, they must be sent to the City Clerk, P.O. Box 3222, Anaheim, CA 92803, or, if hand delivered: City Clerk, City Hall, 200 South Anaheim Blvd., 2nd floor, Anaheim, CA 92805. Each written protest must identify the affected property (by assessor's parcel number or street address), indicate whether it is the solid waste and/or wastewater rate increase that is being protested, and include the signature of the record property owner or tenant, as applicable. Protests received by telephone, electronic mail (e-mail), or Anaheim Anytime will NOT be accepted. All interested parties are invited to attend the public hearing and present written protests and/or written and/or oral comments on the propose, rate iucr1 ases. However, oral comments made at the public hearing will not qualify as a formal protest of the rate increases unless accompanied by a written protest setting forth the required information. If written protests are received from a majority of the affected parcels, the proposed rates will not be implemented. The City of Anaheim wishes to make all of its public meetings and hearings accessible to all members of the public. If requested, the Notice and supporting 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. Section 12132), and the Federal Rules and Regulations adopted in implementation thereof. Any person who requires a disability -related modification or accommodation, including auxiliary aids or services, in order to participate in the public meeting may request such modification, accommodation, aid or service by contacting the Public Works Operations and Maintenance Division either in person at 400 East Vermont Avenue, Anaheim, CA, or by telephone at 714-765-6883, no later than 10:00 a.m. on the day preceding the scheduled public hearing. If you have any questions regarding the proposed increases to solid waste rates or have questions on how to submit a written protest, please contact 714-765-6883. EN ESPANOL: Para recibir una copia de este documento en PROTEST OF PROPOSED RATE INCREASES Espanol sobre la propuesta de incrementar las tarifas de la To protest the proposed rate increases, written protests must colecci6n de basura o del mantenimiento de drenaje por be received by the close of the public hearing, which is favor llamenos at 714-765-6883. scheduled for June 23, 2026, at 5 p.m., or as soon thereafter 2 Im W w o C f E 1 B n .52 N o U m rn m a o OC M a �o a � -6 Ili rn rs y N c U m v 31 (ii a in in w` I wm <Y, �9i �� � iv » "e� •c» sl`s _ e - - m � � x X A 7 tpie E 8 E 3 E E 8 8 E E m 8 m ��a U y�jr H 2 UK C U ti 'm , �zm W m m m m m m O Gi N O O O O o 0 <0 � � M enr m N R - _ o c = L mm 8 m 8 8 m m 8 L Z; 3 m m w Y C7 m rn m o cif E-o` Elm o... o` o` o rV1 s, uLIS C7 w m � w r O _ m d V d = d m � L<z m O U CC c. E a : d c _8 m E 'm � 3 3 o m N o N N •^". �m m m m �9N A � o 69 W N tl m c'i N v ui WpN Ci o m vi V f3K 0 w - �' - oIN. fr- y f9 6 t/l 6u .� 2 lA cmi u 'Z 2 N rC N c m C ,cmi NN rA m h m lA to ti m N N N 1 cmi I'Z C I y u '2 c cma 'm c °' Z h p1 '� c cmi '� c Vl gc a Z N a Z N m '2 N u .cmi Z Z VJ .cmi 2 N rd ra = d= d N m �E Y d d .f. � G �P U dE W m G t0 2 ¢ aC CC N Q eS ¢ ¢ ¢ s ¢ z C ¢ ¢ m L U W A w w o N !9 - z a g Y d m 3 3 3 3 3 3 cs gg A A � — 7 E E A E a E E E eQi eo 8 3 1818 8 $ s P v 3 3 0 3 3 1 e & F m x x m 2. .e 'e 'e 9 C E E E E E E VJ W § a U m F. o � 2 r 0; a n m IS U W ~ w3 wt» •n � vi � � y ` E E E E E � m _= O1 �' h •O �' L.Y E E o a � E u-. � E� y E� :' E� z Ea c m 00 rn a a E &3 a,¢ �W m Tn 3 m 3 3 9 7 3 3 3 m m i V r 6 e9 ri S S - 3 3 3 3 3 3 �i E E E E E E t9iN 8 8 8 8 8 8 W A ei m r m �c s'..fit J Yc CR m N to N fn c r2 m .@ ym m 3 a = $U3 _ > ep 5 3 _ 3 3 3 3 3CC l= R N m m e °n N Ig N m � 3 3 3 3 3 3 Yg x d 7 x V E E E E E E E E E E E E tgi C; 8 8 83 8 8 6/a3/aoas To The City of Anaheim, I own the property located at naheim, CA 92807. The parcel number is -I am writing this letter to protest the proposed fee increase for solid waste and wastewater rates. Please DO NOT increase the solid waste and wastewater rates! Sincerely, Ira Rosenberg N r'* Robert Sierra Anaheim, CA 92808 June 23, 2026 City Clerk, Anaheim City Hall 200 S. Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim, CA 92805 Subject: Opposition to Proposed Utility Rate Increases Dear Mayor and Members of the City Council: ) L -�­CEIVED 788 JJN 2 3 P 3. 3 J I am writing as a concerned resident to express my strong opposition to the proposed solid waste rate increases. While I understand that maintaining and improving public infrastructure requires adequate funding, I believe these proposed increases place an unfair financial burden on Anaheim residents and businesses who are already struggling with rising costs for housing, food, insurance, and other essential expenses. Before approving any rate increase, I respectfully request that the City provide greater transparency regarding the need for these additional revenues. Residents deserve a clear explanation of: • Why the rate increase is necessary. • How the additional revenue will be used. • What cost -saving measures have already been implemented to reduce expenses. • Whether alternative funding sources or operational efficiencies have been fully explored. Many households are already facing financial challenges, and even modest increases in utility bills can have a significant cumulative impact, particularly on seniors, families on fixed incomes, and small businesses. Any rate adjustment should be carefully justified and implemented only after every reasonable effort has been made to minimize costs. I respectfully ask the City Council to postpone approval of the proposed rate increases until residents have had sufficient opportunity to review the supporting financial information and provide meaningful public input. Transparent decision -making and fiscal accountability are essential to maintaining the trust of the community. Thank you for your consideration of my comments and for your service to the residents of Anaheim. I respectfully request that this letter be included in the public record for the hearing regarding the proposed utility rate increases. Sincerel Robert Sierra Mariana Vindigni Anaheim, CA 92808 1016 JUN 23 P 3: 31 June 23, 2026 City Clerk, Anaheim City Hall 200 S. Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim, CA 92805 Subject: Opposition to Proposed Utility Rate Increases Dear Mayor and Members of the City Council: I am writing as a concerned resident to express my strong opposition to the proposed solid waste rate increases. While I understand that maintaining and improving public infrastructure requires adequate funding, I believe these proposed increases place an unfair financial burden on Anaheim residents and businesses who are already struggling with rising costs for housing, food, insurance, and other essential expenses. Before approving any rate increase, I respectfully request that the City provide greater transparency regarding the need for these additional revenues. Residents deserve a clear explanation of: • Why the rate increase is necessary. • How the additional revenue will be used. • What cost -saving measures have already been implemented to reduce expenses. • Whether alternative funding sources or operational efficiencies have been fully explored. Many households are already facing financial challenges, and even modest increases in utility bills can have a significant cumulative impact, particularly on seniors, families on fixed incomes, and small businesses. Any rate adjustment should be carefully justified and implemented only after every reasonable effort has been made to minimize costs. I respectfully ask the City Council to postpone approval of the proposed rate increases until residents have had sufficient opportunity to review the supporting financial information and provide meaningful public input. Transparent decision -making and fiscal accountability are essential to maintaining the trust of the community. Thank you for your consideration of my comments and for your service to the residents of Anaheim. I respectfully request that this letter be included in the public record for the hearing regarding the proposed utility rate increases. Sincerely, Mariana Vindigni Eu ene Chan Anaheim, CA 92808 June 23, 2026 City Clerk, Anaheim City Hall 200 S. Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim, CA 92805 Subject: Opposition to Proposed Utility Rate Increases Dear Mayor and Members of the City Council: ZDA AN 2 3 P 3: 31 F i- rC' _rY CL f RK I am writing as a concerned resident to express my strong opposition to the proposed solid waste rate increases. While I understand that maintaining and improving public infrastructure requires adequate funding, I believe these proposed increases place an unfair financial burden on Anaheim residents and businesses who are already struggling with rising costs for housing, food, insurance, and other essential expenses. Before approving any rate increase, I respectfully request that the City provide greater transparency regarding the need for these additional revenues. Residents deserve a clear explanation of: Why the rate increase is necessary. How the additional revenue will be used. • What cost -saving measures have already been implemented to reduce expenses. • Whether alternative funding sources or operational efficiencies have been fully explored. Many households are already facing financial challenges, and even modest increases in utility bills can have a significant cumulative impact, particularly on seniors, families on fixed incomes, and small businesses. Any rate adjustment should be carefully justified and implemented only after every reasonable effort has been made to minimize costs. I respectfully ask the City Council to postpone approval of the proposed rate increases until residents have had sufficient opportunity to review the supporting financial information and provide meaningful public input. Transparent decision -making and fiscal accountability are essential to maintaining the trust of the community. Thank you for your consideration of my comments and for your service to the residents of Anaheim. I respectfully request that this letter be included in the public record for the hearing regarding the proposed utility rate increases. Sincerely, Eugene Chang Inah Oh Anaheim, CA 92808 June 23, 2026 City Clerk, Anaheim City Hall 200 S. Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim, CA 92805 Subject: Opposition to Proposed Utility Rate Increases Dear Mayor and Members of the City Council: RECEIVED I91b JUN 2 3 P 3. 3 ! CITY ` IfY CLERK 1 �i AW,HIP IM I am writing as a concerned resident to express my strong opposition to the proposed solid waste rate increases. While I understand that maintaining and improving public infrastructure requires adequate funding, I believe these proposed increases place an unfair financial burden on Anaheim residents and businesses who are already struggling with rising costs for housing, food, insurance, and other essential expenses. Before approving any rate increase, I respectfully request that the City provide greater transparency regarding the need for these additional revenues. Residents deserve a clear explanation of: Why the rate increase is necessary. How the additional revenue will be used. • What cost -saving measures have already been implemented to reduce expenses. • Whether alternative funding sources or operational efficiencies have been fully explored. Many households are already facing financial challenges, and even modest increases in utility bills can have a significant cumulative impact, particularly on seniors, families on fixed incomes, and small businesses. Any rate adjustment should be carefully justified and implemented only after every reasonable effort has been made to minimize costs. I respectfully ask the City Council to postpone approval of the proposed rate increases until residents have had sufficient opportunity to review the supporting financial information and provide meaningful public input. Transparent decision -making and fiscal accountability are essential to maintaining the trust of the community. Thank you for your consideration of my comments and for your service to the residents of Anaheim. I respectfully request that this letter be included in the public record for the hearing regarding the proposed utility rate increases. Sincerely, From: Sent: To: Subject: Ruben Soto Wednesday, June 10, 2026 7:28 AM [EXTERNAL] Watch "Happy Birthday Luz you boys better put a ring on it" on YouTube 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: Sent: To: Subject: Ruben Soto [EXTERNAL] Watch "there you go you old men the truth about some of you ###" on YouTube 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: Sent: To: Subject: Ruben Soto Saturday, June 13, 2026 5:33 PM [EXTERNAL] Watch "# a lot of you are being spied on ## you people are sick in your brains at apartments" on YouTube 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: Sent: To: Subject: Ruben Soto [EXTERNAL] Watch "#this is why Christians are evil this verse right here evil on purpose" on YouTube 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: Sent: To: Subject: Ruben Soto Tuesday, June 16, 2026 3:35 PM [EXTERNAL] Watch "3 minutes of powerful gospel Riverside city council meeting. Patricia Locke" on YouTube 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: Isadora Roma Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2026 11:58 AM To: Aliana Meneses; Robert Happle; Public Comment; Ashleigh Aitken; Carlos A. Leon; Ryan Balius; Natalie Rubalcava; Subject: [EXTERNAL] Urgent Public Safety Concern Regarding Aggressive Coyotes in Anaheim Hills Area You don't often get email from Learn why this is important 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. Dear City Council Members and All: I am writing to formally notify the City of Anaheim of an ongoing and serious public safety issue involving aggressive coyotes in the Anaheim Hills area. Over the past several months, residents in our neighborhood have experienced multiple alarming incidents involving coyotes exhibiting unusually bold and aggressive behavior toward both pets and people. These incidents include: • A coyote attack that resulted in the death of a neighbor's cat. • A coyote stalking and approaching an adult resident while she was seated on her front porch making a phone call. • A coyote attack in my backyard that resulted in the death of my dog. • Repeated instances of coyotes approaching residents without displaying the normal fear of humans expected of wild animals. • Traffic -related incidents involving coyotes that create a roadway hazard and risk to motorists. These events demonstrate a pattern of behavior suggesting that the coyotes in this area have become habituated to human presence and pose an increasing risk to public safety. The situation is especially concerning given the number of children who regularly play and walk throughout the neighborhood. The purpose of this letter is to place the City on formal notice that various residents have significant concerns and disdain regarding the presence and behavior of these animals. We respectfully request that the City promptly investigate these incidents, and immediately take action pursuant to the coyote management plan, which includes the utilization of lethal force if necessary. We further request a written response outlining the City's assessment of the situation, the agencies responsible for addressing aggressive wildlife encounters, and any planned actions intended to protect residents, pets, and visitors. Given the documented attacks and repeated encounters, we believe immediate attention is warranted before additional injuries or fatalities occur. Thank you for your prompt consideration of this serious public safety matter. My neighbors and I urgently await your response on this matter, Sincerely, Isadora Roma. Isadora Roma From: Rep. Lou Correa<repcorrea@mail8.housecommunications.gov> Sent: Friday, June 12, 2026 1:35 PM To: Public Comment Subject: [EXTERNAL] Working for You in Washington 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. L" OU C RREA I DOWNTO �1 REPRESENTATIVE CALIFORNIA'S 46TH DISTRICT 1 7- Dear Neighbor, This week in Washington I fought to represent all who call Orange County home. I voted against an unacceptable Republican spending bill that provides another $70 billion to the Department of Homeland Security, discussed what Congress can do to prevent sports fans from being overcharged for watching their favorite teams, and worked across the aisle on bipartisan bills to deliver for Orange County. This week, I voted against the Republican reconciliation bill, which provides another $70 billion for the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS)—including $38.5 billion for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and $26 billion for Customs and Border Protection. Before casting my vote, I submitted three common-sense amendments to prevent DHS and ICE from harming our public safety and targeting contributing members of our community. However, Republicans struck down all three of these amendments. These amendments would have protected contributing members of our community from immigration enforcement, including veterans, people who witness or report a crime, and Vietnamese refugees 1 who came to the U.S. before 1995 and have earned the right to call America home. People who strengthen our community and make it better should not have to fear deportation. Click to view my testimony in front of the House Rules Committee. Congressman Correa testifies before the House Rules Committee This week, I joined my Democratic colleagues on the Homeland Security Committee at a forum examining how this administration has expanded government surveillance of U.S. citizens. We in this country have long valued our freedom and privacy, unlike any other country in the world, but we no longer have that. I will continue to fight for safeguards to protect our civil liberties. The forum can be viewed Congressman Correa speaks at forum on surveillance and privacy rights This week, I worked with my colleagues across the political spectrum to deliver real solutions for everyday Americans. I introduced the , which will help speed up the building of new homes by cutting red tape and making it easier for builders to comply with federal requirements. I also joined my colleagues in introducing the Great American Outdoors Act 250, which will make improvements to our national parks and public lands so more people can benefit from the beautiful lands our nation has to offer. I remain committed to working with my colleagues across the aisle to deliver real results for Orange County and the rest of the country. As we celebrate America's 250th Birthday, we honor the enduring sacrifices of our service members who made our freedom possible. Please share a photo and tribute of a loved one who has served our nation . These special commemorations will be shared on my social media pages. The deadline to submit nominations is Friday, June 26, 2026. LOU C `RREA �AMERICA, HONORING AMERICA'S SERVICE MEMBERS Celebrate America's 250" Birthday and the enduring sacrifices of the Service Members who made our freedom possible. Please share a photo and a tribute of a loved one who has served our nation. These special commemorations will be shared on Congressman Correa's social media. w DEADLINE: Friday, June 26, 2026 To access form use OR Code or https://forms.gle/2VxTfRBi6wRkkdV8 QuestionstoJanet.Brown2@mail.house.gov This week, I spoke with witnesses at a hearing on the Sports Broadcasting Act of 1961 and its effects on the modern broadcast market for major sports leagues. I worked closely with the committee to guarantee that after today, we will be one step closer to making sure sports fans can watch their favorite teams at a reasonable price. Click to view my questioning. Congressman Correa questions witnesses at Judiciary Committee hearing on Sports Broadcasting Act As always, I am committed to serving you, advocating for issues that matter to our community, and connecting you to important resources. If you are experiencing any issues with a federal agency, my office is hereto help. Give us a call at (714) 559-6190. Sincerely, r�+ Rep. Lou Correa Member of Congress Sign up for my newsletter to get updates on this issue and others! CfZyZoZ�7 Visit my website to learn more! Contact Me Washington D.C. 2082 Rayburn House Office Building Washington, DC 20515 (202) 225-2965 Santa Ana Rancho Santiago Community College Building 2323 N. Broadway, Suite 319 Santa Ana, CA 92706 (714) 559-6190 Unsubscribe from future messages. From: Rep. Lou Correa<repcorrea@mail8.housecommunications.gov> Sent: Friday, June 19, 2026 1:13 PM To: Public Comment Subject: [EXTERNAL] Serving What Matters Most, YOU 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. I DOWNTO LOU CRREA j It REPRESENTATIVE , FO CALIRNIA'S 46TH DISTRICT OF4� �I 0s,. Dear Neighbor, What motivates me every day to work hard for our district is simple: community. The people of Orange County are the reason I continue to push forward, and it's your support and trust that drive everything I do. This week, I am proud to share moments that reflect the strength of our community - from uplifting the next generation who will shape our future, to honoring the residents whose lifelong contributions continue to inspire us. Together, these connections are what make our district so special! In honor of the older adults in the 46th Congressional District, I was proud to host a Senior Appreciation Event. We had a wonderful time celebrating our amazing community, connecting with residents, and listening to their concerns. I was joined by the Council on Aging Southern California, who shared helpful resources to keep our seniors informed and supported. We also enjoyed activities together in the Center Greens Butterfly Garden. 1 a <, Congressman Correa celebrating the older residents of the 46th District at the Senior Appreciation Day Event CHECK FOR A BIGGER FUTURE I was proud to secure $1,031,000 in federal funding for Santa Ana College's Criminal Justice Academies. This funding will improve regional training programs and upgrade facilities, ensuring we are preparing for the next generation of correctional and peace officers in Orange County. My commitment to strong law enforcement training, public safety education, and student success will not stop here. By supporting our students today, we are helping build safer communities for tomorrow. Q Congressman Correa presents a check for federal funding to Santa Ana College CHANGES TO CALFRESH If you receive CalFresh benefits, new changes caused by H.R. 1 could affect your eligibility. Now, adults ages 18-64 must complete 20 hours of qualifying work per week OR 80 hours per month to keep benefits, but several exemptions apply. This means that if you do not meet the new work and/or community engagement requirements, it will directly impact your ability to receive benefits. Click he to see more information on the new policies and eligibility. If you have questions or need assistance, please call my office at 714-559-6190. (�%aL�Fresh HONORING OUR SERVICE MEMBERS As we celebrate America's 250th Birthday, we honor the enduring sacrifices of our service members who made our freedom possible. Please share a photo and tribute of a loved one who has served our nation . These special commemorations will be shared on my social media pages. The deadline to submit nominations is Friday, June 26, 2026. LOU C `RREA -�AMERICAN, ALL ` dr HONORING AMERICA'S SERVICE MEMBERS Celebrate America's 250" Birthday and the enduring sacrifices of the Service Members who made our freedom possible. Please share a photo and a tribute of a loved one who has served our nation. These special commemorations will be shared on Congressman Correa's social media. w DEADLINE: Friday, June 26, 2026 To access form use OR Code or https://forms.gle/2VxTfRBi6wRkkdV8 QuestionstoJanet.Brown2@mail.house.gov As always, I am committed to serving you, advocating for issues that matter to our community, and connecting you to important resources. If you are experiencing any issues with a federal agency, my office is hereto help. Give us a call at (714) 559-6190. Sincerely, Rep. Lou Correa Member of Congress Sign up for my newsletter to get updates on this issue and others! � O o Visit my website to learn more! Contact Me Washington D.C. 2082 Rayburn House Office Building Washington, DC 20515 (202) 225-2965 Unsubscribe from future mess Santa Ana Rancho Santiago Community College Building 2323 N. Broadway, Suite 319 Santa Ana, CA 92706 (714) 559-6190 From: Carl Garrison Sent: Saturday, June 13, 2026 12:11 PM To: Public Comment Subject: [EXTERNAL] CCRT You don't often get email from Learn why this is important 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. Why have your frankensteined a Covid program into a homeless industrial complex money pit? Please end the program give it's funding to the Anaheim Police Department and Orange county jails. Carl J Garrison From: Sent: To: Subject: d u rfeycra "Screentime in Schools" 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. 06-13-2026 (P.R.D.D.C.) PARENTS FOR THE RIGHTS OF DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED CHILDREN CRAIG A. DURFEY FOUNDER OF P.R.D.D.C. P.O.BOX 2001 GARDEN GROVE, CA 92842 SOCIALEMOTIONALPAWS.COM FACEBOOK: CRAIG DURFEY U.S. HOUSE OF CONGRESS H2404 - HONORING CRAIG DURFEY FOR HIS FIGHT AGAINST AUTISM ... Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of California. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkq/CREC-2003-03-27/pdf/CREC-2003-03-27.pdf new website socialemotionalpaws.orq To whom it may concern. "SCREENTIME IN SCHOOLS" OPENING STATEMENT OF REP. KEVIN KILEY (R-CA), CHAIRMAN EARLY CHILDHOOD, ELEMENTARY, AND SECONDARY EDUCATION SUBCOMMITTEE "DEFENDING FAITH AND FAMILIES AGAINST GOVERNMENT OVERREACH: MAHMOUD V. TAYLOR" FEBRUARY 10, 2026 (AS PREPARED FOR DELIVERY) PARENTAL RIGHTS ARE FUNDAMENTAL. THAT MEANS PARENTS HAVE A RIGHT TO 1 DIRECT THEIR CHILD'S EDUCATION, AND A RIGHT TO THE INFORMATION NECESSARY TO DO SO. YET ACROSS THE COUNTRY, A NUMBER OF SCHOOL DISTRICTS ARE INTRODUCING CONTROVERSIAL MATERIALS INTO THE CLASSROOMS WHILE KEEPING PARENTS IN THE DARK. ONE OF THE WORST EXAMPLES IS MARYLAND'S MONTGOMERY COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS (MCPS), WHICH INTRODUCED CURRICULUM PROMOTING GENDER IDEOLOGY FOR CHILDREN AS YOUNG AS KINDERGARTEN DURING THE 2022-2023 SCHOOL YEAR. IF A STUDENT DARED TO EVEN QUESTION THE CONTENT OF THESE LESSONS, THE DISTRICT COACHED TEACHERS TO CHASTISE STUDENTS AND REPEAT THE SAME LINE: "THAT COMMENT IS HURTFUL." THESE TEACHINGS CONFLICT WITH THE SINCERELY HELD BELIEFS OF MANY PARENTS WHO ARE CONCERNED ABOUT THE RISE OF CLASSROOM CONTENT THAT IS NOT AGEAPPROPRIATE FOR YOUNG CHILDREN. A GROUP OF PARENTS FROM MANY FAITHS - INCLUDING MUSLIM, CATHOLIC, AND UKRAINIAN ORTHODOX FAMILIES - ASKED THE MONTGOMERY DISTRICT FOR ADVANCED NOTICE OF DAYS ON WHICH THESE CONCEPTS WOULD BE TAUGHT SO THEY COULD OPT THEIR STUDENTS OUT. THE PARENTS DID NOT ASK TO DICTATE CURRICULUM NOR FORBID OTHER FAMILIES FROM PARTICIPATING IN THESE LESSONS - THEY MERELY WANTED THE OPPORTUNITY TO KEEP THEIR KIDS HOME FOR A DAY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THEIR BELIEFS. THE DISTRICT SAID NO. THE CASE WENT TO THE SUPREME COURT. IN MAHMOUD V. TAYLOR, THE COURT GRANTED A PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION ON THE GROUNDS THAT THE PARENTS' RIGHT TO OPT OUT OF MCPS GENDER AND SEXUALITY TEACHINGS WAS PROTECTED UNDER THE FREE EXERCISE CLAUSE. THE COURT HELD THAT "A GOVERNMENT BURDENS THE RELIGIOUS EXERCISE OF PARENTS WHEN IT REQUIRES THEM TO SUBMIT THEIR CHILDREN TO INSTRUCTION THAT POSES'A VERY REAL THREAT OF UNDERMINING' THE RELIGIOUS BELIEFS AND PRACTICES THAT THE PARENTS WISH TO INSTILL." THE COURT CONCLUDED THAT, "FOR MANY PEOPLE OF FAITH, THERE ARE FEW RELIGIOUS ACTS MORE IMPORTANT THAN THE RELIGIOUS EDUCATION OF THEIR CHILDREN," THEREBY RECEIVING, "A GENEROUS MEASURE OF CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTION." THESE ARE COMMON-SENSE PRINCIPLES. RELIGIOUS FREEDOM IS A CORNERSTONE OF AMERICAN LIFE, AND PARENTS DO NOT SURRENDER IT FOR THEIR CHILDREN WHEN THEY ENROLL IN PUBLIC SCHOOL. UNFORTUNATELY, N WE'LL HEAR TESTIMONY TODAY THAT SOME DISTRICTS ARE TRYING TO CIRCUMVENT - OR EVEN DEFY - THE COURT'S HOLDING IN MAHMOUD. THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IS ATTEMPTING TO MINIMIZE THE SCOPE OF MAHMOUD BY GIVING LOCAL DISTRICTS VAST DISCRETION OVER HOW AND WHEN OPT -OUTS ARE ALLOWED. SEATTLE PUBLIC SCHOOLS HAS GONE EVEN FURTHER BY BANNING PARENTAL OPT -OUTS FROM CERTAIN CLASSES. THESE REPORTS ARE GRAVELY CONCERNING TO THE COMMITTEE. FOR THE PAST CENTURY, THE SUPREME COURT HAS REPEATEDLY HELD THAT PARENTS HAVE A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT TO DIRECT THE UPBRINGING, HEALTH, AND EDUCATION OF THEIR CHILDREN - INCLUDING FAITH. AS RECENTLY AS 2000, THE COURT CALLED IT "PERHAPS THE OLDEST OF THE FUNDAMENTAL LIBERTY INTERESTS RECOGNIZED." TODAY'S HEARING WILL EXAMINE THE MAHMOUD CASE, THE STATE OF PARENTAL RIGHTS IN AMERICA, AND WHETHER DISTRICTS ARE COMPLYING WITH THE LAW. IN A WORLD WHERE NEW AND CONTROVERSIAL TYPES OF CONTENT ARE FINDING THEIR WAY INTO CLASSROOMS, IT IS ESSENTIAL THAT PARENTS MAINTAIN CONTROL OVER THEIR CHILD'S EDUCATION. THE COMMITTEE STANDS ON THE SIDE OF PARENTS, STUDENTS, AND THE CONSTITUTION. HTTPS://WWW.YOUTUBE.COM/WATCH?V=ANNSB6IYBLM https://socialemotionalpaws.com/blog-post-1 /f/us-congress-education-hearing-on- %E2%80%9Cscreentime-in-schools%E2%80%9D-%E2%80%93-ju 3 From: CRAIG DURFEY Sent: Saturday, June 13, 2026 10:40 PM To: Craig A Durfey; Liz Vasquez; <Public Records Request >; Lisa Kim; communityrelations; Jennifer.Carey@sen.ca.gov; assemblymember.ta@assembly.ca.gov; Public Comment; irvinecitycouncil@cityofirvine.org; "CM@cityofirvine.org"; "Whill@Cityofirvine.org" Subject: [EXTERNAL] Fwd: There is no current federal law in the U.S. Congress that specifically addresses e-sports addiction in schools Attachments: DIGITAL MADNESS P.28-P.29 8-18-241mage_20240818_0005jpg; DIGITAL MADNESS P.28-P.29 8-18-241mage_20240818_0004jpg; DIGITAL MADNESS P.28-P.29 8-18-241mage_20240818_0003jpg; DIGITAL MADNESS P.28-P.29 8-18-241mage_ 20240818_0001jpg 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. ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: <(unknown sender)> Date: Sat, Jun 13, 2026 at 8:20 PM Subject: There is no current federal law in the U.S. Congress that specifically addresses e-sports addiction in schools To: (P.R.D.D.C.) PARENTS FOR THE RIGHTS OF DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED CHILDREN CRAIG A. DURFEY FOUNDER OF P.R.D.D.C. P.O.BOX 2001 GARDEN GROVE, CA 92842 SOCIALEMOTIONALPAWS.COM FACEBOOK: CRAIG DURFEY U.S. HOUSE OF CONGRESS H2404 - HONORING CRAIG DURFEY FOR HIS FIGHT AGAINST AUTISM ... Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of California. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkq/CREC-2003-03-27/pdf/CREC-2003-03-27.pdf new website socialemotionalpaws.org U.S. Congressional Legislation on E-Sports and Gambling Addictions in Schools There is no current federal law in the U.S. Congress that specifically addresses e-sports addiction in schools. The legislative focus in recent years has been on problem gambling, especially in the context of legalized sports betting, rather than on e-sports or gaming addiction in educational settings. Related Federal Gambling Addiction Bills Several bills introduced in Congress aim to address the broader public health crisis of gambling addiction, which could indirectly affect youth exposed to gambling through e-sports or other platforms: SAFE Bet Act (H.R. 9590) - Introduced in September 2024, this is the first comprehensive federal bill to set "minimum federal standards" for states offering sports betting. It would require states to meet federal standards on advertising, z affordability, and Al use, and could apply to online betting platforms that might be linked to e-sports betting gamblingharm.org. GRIT Act (S. 3579 / H.R. 6982) - Introduced by Sen. Blumenthal and Rep. Salinas, this bill would dedicate 50% of the federal sports excise tax to gambling addiction treatment and research, with 75% going to states and 25% to the National Institute on Drug Abuse. It does not raise taxes but would fund prevention, treatment, and research for problem gambling National Council on Problem Gambling+1. POINTS Act (H.R. 1000) - Introduced in March 2026, this bipartisan bill would redirect a share of existing sports wagering tax revenue toward prevention, screening, intervention, and treatment programs for gambling addiction, without creating new taxes ReadWrite. Why E-Sports Addictions Are Not a Current Legislative Priority While e-sports and gaming are growing, U.S. federal policy has not yet targeted "gaming addiction" in schools. The focus has been on problem gambling because: Legalized sports betting is widespread (30+ states allow online betting) gamblingharm.org. Gambling addiction rates are high among bettors, with 40-50% experiencing problems gamblingharm.org. Federal excise tax revenue from sports wagering is substantial, creating a funding stream for treatment National Council on Problem Gambling. Possible Legislative Pathways 3 If e-sports addiction in schools becomes a more pressing public health concern, lawmakers could: Adapt existing gambling addiction frameworks to include video game and e-sports use. Introduce school -specific provisions in education or public health bills. Partner with state and local governments to address youth gaming habits. In summary: As of now, U.S. Congress has no law on e-sports addiction in schools, but related gambling addiction bills like the SAFE Bet Act, GRIT Act, and POINTS Act could be adapted to address broader gaming and e-sports risks if public health concerns grow gamblingharm.org+3. Why E-Sports Are Not Regulated as Gambling E-sports are generally considered competitive video gaming rather than gambling, so they fall outside the scope of existing problem gambling laws. However, if e-sports were to be commercialized (e.g., betting on matches), states with responsible gaming frameworks could apply similar safeguards. Possible Legislative Directions While no state has yet addressed e-sports addictions in schools, lawmakers could draw from: 4 Problem gambling prevention statutes (e.g., Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York) that require operators to provide self -exclusion options and educational materials. School -based mental health and technology use policies that address screen time, online behavior, and addiction risks. Federal guidance from the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) on digital addiction prevention. Bottom Line As of now, no U.S. state has passed legislation specifically targeting e-sports addictions in schools. Current laws focus on gambling and problem -gambling prevention, not e-sports. Any future regulation would likely emerge from broader mental health, technology use, or gambling prevention frameworks, rather than a dedicated e-sports addiction law. The American Psychiatric Association classifies compulsive gaming under Internet Gaming Disorder (IGD) in the DSM-5, categorizing it as a "condition for further study" rather than a standalone official diagnosis. The Los Angeles Times has covered this topic multiple times, discussing both the psychiatric debate and the gaming industry's pushback. [1, 2] Notable Los Angeles Times coverage includes: • The Clinical Debate: When the World Health Organization (WHO) officially recognized "gaming disorder" as a mental health condition, the LA Times Compulsive video -game playing could be mental health... detailed the international milestone and the implications for behavioral health. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5] • Academic Pushback: The LA Times reported on backlash from local researchers, including scholars at UC Irvine, who objected to categorizing gaming as an illness, arguing it could unfairly pathologize normal hobbyist 5 behavior UC Irvine objects to WHO's plan to classify `gaming disorder' as a. [1, 2] • Industry Stance: Early LA Times reporting on the APA's initial inclusion of the condition highlighted how trade groups and the video game industry Gaming junkies get no diagnosis - Los Angeles Times warned against prematurely labeling gaming habits as an addiction. [1] For further guidance, could you tell me what specific aspect of the DSM-5 criteria or esports culture interests you (e.g., diagnosis symptoms, competitive stress vs. addiction)? I can help find more focused information for you. Intl 8 sites (Internet) Gaming Disorder in DSM-5 and ICD-11: A Case of... - PMC - NIH In 2013, Internet gaming disorder (IGD) was included in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) as a con... National Institutes of Health (.gov) Internet Gaming - American Psychiatric Association Addiction to gaming is described in the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders ( Psychiatry.org UC Irvine academics come to the defense of players after ... Feb 8, 2018 — Is excess gaming a mental disorder? UCI fights back, saying it's unfair to gaming world. 6 Los Angeles Times Show all This is for informational purposes only. For medical advice or diagnosis, consult a professional. Al responses may include mistakes. Learn more https://www.google.com/search?q=Ios+angles+time+news+story+e- sports+dms+5+disorder&riz=1 C1 ONGR enUS117BUS1178&oq=los+angles+time+n ews+story+e- sports+dms+5+disorder&gs lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUyBggAEEUYOTIJCAEQIRgKGKAB MgklAhAhGAoYoAEYBwgDECEYjwLSAQgyMzlwajBgN6gCALACAA&sourceid=chro me&ie=UTF-8 Like Dislike South Korea's Struggle to "Unplug" — Energy, Politics, and Social Isolation South Korea is grappling with multiple "inability to unplug" challenges — from being tethered to fossil fuels in its energy system to political gridlock and a surge in socially withdrawn youth. Energy dependency and the "power trilemma" The country's heavy reliance on fossil fuels — 58.5% of its power mix in 2023, with 26.8% from LNG — has left it vulnerable to global price shocks. The Russia - Ukraine war in 2022 spiked LNG costs, pushing up wholesale electricity prices and forcing state -run utility KEPCO to sell at regulated rates that didn't cover fuel costs. This created a "vicious cycle" of debt, bond issuance, and political pressure to keep tariffs low, while slow renewable adoption missed opportunities to cut prices and reduce environmental costs ieefa.org. The result is a power tariff trilemma: balancing energy security, competitiveness, and sustainability. Political polarization and governance paralysis In late 2024, President Yoon Suk-yeol's attempted martial law and subsequent impeachment exposed deep societal divisions. The crisis revealed a political system where centralization of power and factionalism persist, even as civil society mobilizes. This instability has delayed policy reforms, including those needed to diversify energy sources and address social issues East Asia Forum+1. Social isolation among youth Parallel to political and energy struggles, South Korea is facing a "silent crisis" of extreme social withdrawal. Around 540,000 young people aged 19-34 are socially and economically inactive, often confined to their homes for years. Causes are varied — from childhood trauma and depression to unemployment and "just taking a break" — with 45.6% citing "other" reasons The Korea Times. This phenomenon, akin to Japan's hikikomori, reflects a broader societal inability to "unplug" from isolation, mirroring the energy sector's inability to disconnect from fossil fuel dependence. Interconnected challenges These issues are linked: economic stress from high energy costs and political instability can exacerbate youth unemployment and mental health struggles, while social withdrawal may further erode civic engagement and political participation. Addressing them requires coordinated action — diversifying energy sources, reforming regulated markets, and expanding support for reintegration programs — to help South Korea "unplug" from its current constraints and build a more resilient, inclusive society. South Korea wrestles with inability to unplug - Sparr_h 0 DIG,ITAL 1AADNESS How SOCIAL MEDIA Is Driving Our MENTAL HEALTH CRISIS — and How to Restore Our Sanity NICHOLAS KARDARAS7 PH.D. AUTHOR OF GLOW KIDS $28.99 / $38.99 Can. We're on fire, struggling with record rates of depression, loneliness, anxiety, over- doses, mass shootings, and suicide. While COVID-19 exacerbated this crisis, we were at record levels of psychiatric distress before the pandemic. So what's driving our mental health epidemic? In Digital Madness, Dr. Nicholas Karda- ras reveals the toxic impact of our tech obsession and corrosive social media, espe- cially on teenagers and young adults. As we've become mad for our devices, our devices increasingly have been driving us mad. Social media platforms—Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, Instagram, TikTok, as well as Google's search algorithms —are designed to create extremes of emotion, addictive dependency, and depression - inducing sedentary isolation. These plat- forms also shape the way that we think and the way that we process information into binary, black -and -white choices. Such polar- ized thinking is dangerous for politics and our society, and symptomatic of serious mental disorders. We've been manipulated and driven insane by a "New Technocracy" of modern-day robber barons motivated by greed and hubris. But there is a solution. Dr. Kardaras explains how classical philosophy that encourages resilience, critical thinking, and the pursuit of genuine purpose in our lives can restore us to sanity. Digital Mad- ness reveals the toxic and addicting impact of Big Tech, and shows how to break free from it. s u: 28 DIGITAL MADNESS bias and agenda, Google decided to ditch its now meaningless "Don't Be Evil" motto; it was removed completely from Google's corporate code of conduct in 2018.19 Evil was now permissible —of course it was. And one may argue this is indeed the inevitable way of growth and power; as Lord Acton famously said, "Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely." So why wouldn't this apply to the tech industry and the people who created it? After all, we're talking about more wealth and real power than any human being has ever expe- rienced. The question that we need to ask then is how would their perspectives —even their humanity itself —be warped by such power? To be clear, none of this had been my original focus. As a psychologist specializing in mental health and addiction, my entire focus over the past decade had been "screen addiction," not the larger context of the cultural and economic aspects of the problem. Having seen firsthand the increasingly adverse clinical effects of screen time, I'd become alarmed at how quickly these new magical devices were creating serious problems for people —especially younger ones. I started writing about, researching, clinically treating, and gen- erally raising awareness about the impacts of the screen invasion on our society and the attendant "tech addiction" that invariably came with it. My entire focus had been technology addiction, as I went on to develop treatment programs and protocols to address what was becoming a growing global epidemic. I had even been contracted by the U.S. military to do trainings for the Department of Defense (DoD) mental health providers on how to assess and treat video game addiction. Gaming addiction is so severe in the military that there have been several documented and shocking cases of military babies dying in the crib from parental neglect as their fathers played marathon video game sessions. The problem became so significant that the DoD had to create a new cause of death for the infant death certificates: "Death due to Electronic Distraction:'20 I began to realize that, like those neglectful video -game -playing military fathers, we were all, to some degree or another, "electronically distracted" not only from our lives but from the bigger picture as well. Yes, tech addiction —bad. But that VR cow helped me to realize that ADDICTED TO THE MATRIX 29 n't I was pissing in the wind by myopically focusing on too much screen Ite 5 time as the problem, without understanding and addressing the larger societal dynamics that were occurring. I had a nagging and growing sense that the problem was much deeper and direr than simple yet horrible "tech addiction"; habitu- ation to our devices just happened to be a necessary mechanism for a more comprehensive agenda. The problem was indeed much more complex than "Johnny and Suzie like to be on their screens too much." There were major societal shifts happening; there were mental and medical impacts; there were sociopolitical and economic implications. Most importantly, our species was getting weaker and dying. And as I researched this book, I discovered that this wasn't just about greed (although that's always a factor); greed alone is too pe- destrian for the most powerful people who have ever lived. Greed is so yesterday. I'll discuss those other motives more in part 2 of the book. Regardless of whether the motivation is greed or something more, the agenda is clearly more than merely tech addiction. Addiction as control is a necessary ingredient —as it always has been in power dy- namics and oligarchies throughout the ages. Because addiction traps a person; it crushes their free will and makes an individual a slave to their addictive impulses. Rational choice is gone, and what's left is an all -consuming craving or desire for more of whatever the person is addicted to —a craving that doesn't seem rational, as it often has adverse impacts on a person's life: the diabetic with such a severe sugar craving that they'll eat the entire gallon of ice cream, despite the potential for a diabetic coma. Or the smoker with lung cancer and emphysema who just can't give up their Marlboros. The Dopamine Cage On a human level, addiction can seem confounding. Why would an otherwise rational person act so irrationally in the furtherance or pur- suit of their addiction? Yet on a neurophysiological level, addiction is fairly simple to understand, and it starts with the feel -good neu- rotransmitter dopamine and how it affects the brain's reward system. When a person engages in a feel -good dopaminergic behavior From: Sent: To: Subject: Craig A Durfey Tuesday, June 16, 2026 8:18 PM [EXTERNAL] Fwd: Apps dangers protect children 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. ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Craig Durfey Date: Tue, Jun 16, 2026 at 8:15 PM https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=989874970340334&set=a. 106374938690346&type=3&mib extid=wwXlfr Sent from my Phone From: Gigi Holiday Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2026 1:40 PM To: City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net> Cc: mayor@anaheim.net; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; districtl@anaheim.net; district2@anaheim.net; district3@anaheim.net; district4@anaheim.net; district5@anaheim.net; Natalie Rubalcava <NRubalcava@anaheim.net> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Public Comment for City Council Record -Flag Display Concern You don't often get email from Learn why this is important 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. Dear City Council Members and City Clerk, I am writing to follow up on the correspondence I previously submitted regarding the display of the Pride flag on city property. I would appreciate confirmation that my letter was received and entered into the public record. If there is a city policy, agenda item, or public process governing decisions regarding flag displays, I would also appreciate information on where I may review it. Thankyou foryour time and consideration. Sincerely, Ms. Tamayo Holiday On Thu, Jun 11, 2026 at 12:03 PM Gigi Holiday To the City Council / City of Anaheim, wrote: I am writing to share my personal perspective regarding the display of the Pride flag on city property or as part of official city flag arrangements. While I respect that many individuals and groups hold deeply meaningful beliefs and identities, I do not support the use of government or city display spaces for ideological or symbolic flags that do not represent the community as a whole in a neutral way. In my view, city spaces should remain inclusive and representative of all residents equally without endorsing specific social or political messages through official symbols. Maintaining neutrality helps ensure that public institutions remain welcoming to everyone regardless of personal beliefs. I want to share that this is disappointing to me personally, as I take pride in my city and appreciate its commitment to serving and respecting all people. However, I do not believe that official symbolic displays that represent specific viewpoints reflect that goal of equal representation. In my view, such displays move beyond inclusion and into endorsement, which many residents may not feel represents them. The presence of the pride flag may be considered to be inclusive while it outright excludes others and is a misuse of the role of the city's government. Public institutions serve the entire community, and I believe official displays should reflect shared civic identity rather than selected symbolic messages. I respectfully encourage the city to maintain consistent standards for flag displays that uphold equal representation for all members of the community. I appreciate the city's service to all residents and encourage continued focus on unity, shared civic values, and fairness in public representation. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Grace Tamayo Holiday From: Gigi Holiday Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2026 12:03 PM To: City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net> Cc: mayor@anaheim.net; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; districtl@anaheim.net; district2@anaheim.net; district3@anaheim.net; district4@anaheim.net; district5@anaheim.net; Natalie Rubalcava <NRubalcava@anaheim.net> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Public Comment for City Council Record -Flag Display Concern You don't often get email from Learn why this is important 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. To the City Council / City of Anaheim, I am writing to share my personal perspective regarding the display of the Pride flag on city property or as part of official city flag arrangements. While I respect that many individuals and groups hold deeply meaningful beliefs and identities, I do not support the use of government or city display spaces for ideological or symbolic flags that do not represent the community as a whole in a neutral way. In my view, city spaces should remain inclusive and representative of all residents equally without endorsing specific social or political messages through official symbols. Maintaining neutrality helps ensure that public institutions remain welcoming to everyone regardless of personal beliefs. I want to share that this is disappointing to me personally, as I take pride in my city and appreciate its commitment to serving and respecting all people. However, I do not believe that official symbolic displays that represent specific viewpoints reflect that goal of equal representation. In my view, such displays move beyond inclusion and into endorsement, which many residents may not feel represents them. The presence of the pride flag may be considered to be inclusive while it outright excludes others and is a misuse of the role of the city's government. Public institutions serve the entire community, and I believe official displays should reflect shared civic identity rather than selected symbolic messages. I respectfully encourage the city to maintain consistent standards for flag displays that uphold equal representation for all members of the community. I appreciate the city's service to all residents and encourage continued focus on unity, shared civic values, and fairness in public representation. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Grace Tamayo Holiday From: B Bulman Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2026 11:18 PM To: Public Comment; Ashleigh Aitken; Carlos A. Leon; Ryan Balius; Natalie Rubalcava; Norma C. Kurtz; Kristen Maahs; Natalie Meeks Subject: [EXTERNAL] Please vote NO on the Shea/Festival Center apartments — It's a safety issue You don't often get email from Learn why this is important 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. Dear Council Member, I am writing to you as a resident of Anaheim to ask you to please vote "No" on the proposed apartments at the Anaheim Hills Festival Center. I lived here during the Canyon Fire 2 in 2017, and I will never forget the feeling of being stuck in my car, watching the smoke get closer, and literally not moving for over an hour. It wasn't just "traffic" —it was a total standstill. The thought of adding hundreds of new apartments and about 1000+ more people to that exact same escape route is terrifying to those of us who have actually been in that situation. The reports for this project say that adding these cars will "only" add about 7 minutes to the evacuation time. But when you're already stuck for three hours and the fire is moving toward you, 7 minutes is a lifetime. We don't have extra roads or "secret" ways out of the Hills; we all end up on the same few lanes. Adding more people to a neighborhood that is already a bottleneck during a fire just feels like a tragedy waiting to happen. I understand that the city needs housing, but it shouldn't be built in a place where people are already struggling to get out safely. Please don't make an existing danger even worse just for a new development. We are asking you to prioritize the lives and safety of the people who already live here and pay taxes here. Sincerely, William and Cindy Bulman From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: d u rfeycra [EXTERNAL] 1 There is no current federal law in the U.S. Congress that specifically addresses mental health e-sports addiction in schools Attachments: DIGITAL MADNESS P.28-P.29 8-18-241mage_20240818_0005jpg; DIGITAL MADNESS P.28-P.29 8-18-241mage_20240818_0004jpg; DIGITAL MADNESS P.28-P.29 8-18-241mage_20240818_0003jpg; DIGITAL MADNESS P.28-P.29 8-18-241mage_ 20240818_0001jpg 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. (P.R.D.D.C.) PARENTS FOR THE RIGHTS OF DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED CHILDREN CRAIG A. DURFEY FOUNDER OF P.R.D.D.C. P.O.BOX 2001 GARDEN GROVE, CA 92842 SOCIALEMOTIONALPAWS.COM FACEBOOK: CRAIG DURFEY U.S. HOUSE OF CONGRESS H2404 - HONORING CRAIG DURFEY FOR HIS FIGHT AGAINST AUTISM ... Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of California. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkq/CREC-2003-03-27/pdf/CREC-2003-03-27.pdf new website socialemotionalpaws.orq The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20500 U.S. Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr The U.S. Department of Health & Human Services Hubert H. Humphrey Building 200 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20201 Toll Free Call Center: 1-877-696-6775 Federal Communications Commission 45 L Street NE Washington, DC 20554 Link Phone: 1-888-225-5322 ASL Video Call: 1-844-432-2275 Fax: 1-866-418-0232 Dear President Trump Requesting your consideration executive order proclaiming social medial gaming, gambling, restricting under 16 years old due to mental health crises, causing rot Lasting brain rot effects from being chronically online 60 Minutes Australia Lasting brain rot effects from being chronically online 160 Minu , CA State SCR 73 Blue Light 2019 causing myopia, sleep deprivation note China restrict with screentime. with mental health crises from excessive screentime, 1.8 million children reported having anxieties, U.S. Congress Education Hearing on z I'Screentime in Schools" - June 2025 Secretary Kennedy Announces HHS Action to Reduce Harmful Screen Use and Protect Children Online, WASHINGTON—MAY 20, 2026—The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Office of the Surgeon General today released the Surgeon General's Warning on the Harms of Screen Use: An Advisory and Toolkit on How to Protect Children and Adolescents, which raises national awareness about the growing risks associated with excessive and harmful screen use among young people. Secretary Kennedy Announces HHS Action to Reduce Harmful Screen U to FCC Chairman Brendan Carr called the review necessary at a time when screen time use has surged at schools across the nation, particularly since COVID. FCC launches sweeping review of $313 school internet subsidy progr , New surgeon general advisory suggests screen time limits for kids with HHS Action to Reduce Harmful Screen Use and Protect Children Onli . Requesting consideration social medial mental health crises, ban all schools, all ages E-Sports a DMS 5 disorder that have spread in the U.S. with ages under 13 years old the past surgeon general recommended for safety no to any Tech. existing Federal current laws under U.S. Key Federal Statutory References34 USC § 20341 (Child Abuse Reporting): Defines "child abuse" to include "mental injury" alongside physical injury, sexual abuse, or neglect.42 U.S. Code § 5106g According to 34 USC 20341, students spend to much with this as non -educational activity to causing excessive screentime. mental injury is defined as: Harm to a child's psychological or intellectual functioning. Exhibited by severe anxiety, depression, withdrawal, or outward aggressive behavior. Demonstrated by a change in behavior, emotional response, or cognition with children harm from screentime, CA SCR 73 blue light 2019 mental health international crises, U.S. Congress attempting address various bills however the rule 230 impeding to hold industry hold accountable. As in CA State the protection is limited due to awareness by CA state understanding from brain injury addictions, consideration executive order proclaiming social media crises As example The state superintendent has limited authority over school districts, which are locally managed. The officeholder instead manages the California Department of Education. This agency guides local school districts and also provides partial oversight. The state superintendent also typically takes advantage of the bully pulpit on education issues. Shaw and Barrera advance to run-off for state schools superintend with Parents are typically asked to sign paperwork at enrollment granting consent for the schools to give their kids laptops. Nicki Petrossi said when she initially refused to sign it in 2024, the school district in Fullerton, California, told her that she was legally barred from doing so. According to a letter the district provided her, reviewed by NBC News, 3 administrators argued state rules require children to use computers if that's how the school is teaching a curriculum. Parents are opting kids out of school laptops, returning them to A spokesperson for the California Department of Education said "how a district implements the state -adopted standards is up to the district." The district did not respond to a request for comment. Federal law addresses emotional child abuse primarily through definitions within reporting statutes, notably 34 USC 20341, which defines "mental injury" as harm to a child's psychological or intellectual functioning, often shown by severe anxiety, depression, or withdrawal. This includes behavioral changes, emotional dysfunction, or cognitive issues. Key Federal Statutory References34 USC § 20341 The state superintendent has limited authority over school districts, which are locally managed. The officeholder instead manages the California Department of Education. This agency guides local school districts and also provides partial oversight. Shaw and Barrera advance to run-off for state schools superintend UK to ban under-16s from social media. Here's what apps are included and when it is set to start The U.K. is set to ban under-16s from several social media platforms as the government accelerates its efforts to protect young people from online harm. The move for a "full ban" comes after a government consultation conducted between March and May found that 9 out of 10 parents backed such a measure. The UK government, led by Prime Minister Keir Starmer, has announced a landmark ban on social media for under-16s, with restrictions also targeting harmful features on gaming and livestreaming platforms Yahoo+1. UK to ban under-16s from social media. Here's what apps are inclu Digital Madness: How Social Media Is Driving Our Mental Health Crisis --and How to Restore Our Sanity: P.18 I had even been contacted by the U.S. military to do training for the Department of defense (DoD) mental health providers on how to assess and treat video game addiction. Gaming is so severe in the military that There have been several documented and socking cases of military babies dying in the crib from parent neglect as their father played marathon video game sessions. The problem became so significant that the (DoD) mental had to create a new cause of death for the infant death certificates: "Death due to Electric Distraction." With Video Game Addiction: ScreenStrong's Founding Story (#113) 4 Esports, short for electronic sports, refers to organized, competitive video gaming where individuals or teams compete in various game titles across genres such as strategy, first -person shooter, sports simulations, and multiplayer online battle arenas [1]. These competitions range from amateur to professional levels and are often broadcast live to audiences online or in arenas, with players and teams frequently sponsored and competing for significant prize pools. Esports has evolved into a global phenomenon, blending elements of traditional sports, entertainment, and digital culture. Frontiers I Promoting mental health in esports A US survey of gambling among adolescents and young adults reported that gambling is widespread among US youths, which is a cause of concern [30]. The cost of gambling addiction in Sweden in 2018 https://pmc.ncbi.nim.nih.Aov/articles/PMC11396016 The devastating effects of video game addiction on children 160 Minutes Australia. https://socialemotionalpaws.com/blog-post-1 /f/the-devastating-effects-of-video- qame-addiction-on-children-%7C-60 Why There Are Treatment Centers for Gaming Addiction —And What That Should Tell Every Parent with Dr. Hilarie Cashhttps:// https://socialemotionalpaws.com/blog-post-1/f/why-there-are- treatment-centers-for-gaming-addiction%E2%80%94and-what-tha with NASEF I Free Middle School & High School Esports Clubs What Happens When You Take Your Teen's Phone Away: Understanding Screen Addiction & Withdrawal (#262) What Haaaens When You Take Your Teen's Phone Awav: Understandina Screen Addiction & Withdrawal (#262) Video game addiction (internet gaming disorder) is characterized by severely reduced control over gaming habits, resulting in negative impacts on daily functioning, including personal, social, educational and occupational responsibilities. While millions of people play video games, only a small percentage develop video game addiction. _ittps://socialemotionalpaws.com/blog- post-1/f/the-dark-side-of-gaming-%7C-documentary with BLOC POST Video game addiction, also called internet gaming disorder, is a condition characterized by severely reduced control over gaming habits, resulting in negative consequences in many aspects of your life, including self -care, relationships, school and work. https://socialemotionalpaws.com/blog-post-1/f/the- basement-generation-we-know-the-harms-of-social-media-for-gir Middle- and high-school students across the country are chugging energy drinks like water. https://socialemotionalpaws.com/blog-post-1/f/is-video-game-addiction- really-an-addiction 5 Teens often begin the day with a can after staying up late studying, gaming or texting, teachers and principals say. They drink more throughout the day to stay alert in class, and still more in the evening to grind through homework. When schools ban the drinks, students often pound them before class or hide them in other containers. It can hinder learning, disrupt class and, in some cases, cause seizures. Students regularly visit the school nurse's office, complaining of rapid heart rates and anxiety attacks after consuming several energy drinks, administrators say. Caffeine consumption is linked to heightened feelings of anxiety and depression, which are on the rise among adolescents. "I think every single kid is drinking some form of energy drink at my school," says Jefferson City, Mo., 17-year-old Jacqueline Rogers. Herself included. "We use caffeine because we overwork ourselves with activities and classes." https://socialemotionalpaws.com/blog-post-1 /f/teens%E2%80%99-energy-drink- habit-is-ampinq-anxiety-disruptinq-class-and Reclaim Vacation: 8 Reasons to Leave Video Games at Home Don't let screens steal your family's best moments —here's why a game -free vacation is the best gift you can give. https://socialemotionalpaws.com/blog-post-1/f/reclaim-vacation- 8-reasons-to-leave-video-games-at-home This lawsuit is rooted in the failure of video game companies to warn minors about the risks of video game addiction. We aim to hold these corporations accountable for negligence and its impact on the lives of young gamers. If you've suffered due to excessive gaming, your story matters, and justice can be sought. Your journey from gaming addiction to recovery matters. Let your voice be heard, and let's work together to ensure future generations of gamers don't face the same challenges. Join us in this pivotal movement for justice and accountability in the gaming industry. https://socialemotionalpaws.com/blog-post-1/f/video-game- addiction-lawsuit Kiley Holds Hearing on Screentime in Schools https://socialemotionalpaws.com/bloq-post-1 /f/ki ley-holds-hearing-on-screentime- in-schools Hearing: "Screentime in Schools" Early Childhood, Elementary, and https://socialemotionalpaws.com/blog-post-1 /f/hearing-screentime-in-schools- early-chi ldhood-elementary-and 6 The Importance of Child Protection in esports https://socialemotionalpaws.com/blog-post-1 /f/the-importance-of-child-protection- in-esports Stop the gaming addiction before you throw away college tuition. DID YOU KNOW that the average college student addicted to gaming spends between 5-8 hours per day on gaming, with a minimum of 31 hours per week? And that nearly half of all college students feel that gaming has gotten in the way of their academic performance. It's true. In the college world, video games are definitely not all fun and games. "One of the top reasons for college dropouts in the U.S. is online gaming addiction," said Federal Communications Commissioner Deborah Taylor. Studies show that 85% of college boys are gamers, and one in eight develops addiction patterns. In a college of 20,000 students (assuming half are boys), 8,500 are video game players. That means 1,063 students are at risk of dropping out. More than that, the research has shown a negative correlation between gaming addiction and expected college engagement, GPA, and drug and alcohol violations that occur during the first year in college. Will Your Gamer Survive College This Fall? EXCLUSIVE: American children have quietly become hooked on video game supplements that have DOUBLE the caffeine of Red Bull and may stunt their growth and warp their brains, experts warn Energy drink G FUEL has rocketed to popularity in recent years with sales doubling from 2019 to 2021 Company has partnered with gaming personalities and brands popular among the youth to advertise It also features many candy -like flavors featuring characters like Naruto and Sonic the Hedgehog One leading group warns that 50% of US adolescents use energy drinks despite being recommended not to American teenagers have become hooked on ultra-caffeinated video game supplements that are fueling a sleep deprivation crisis among the country's youth, experts have warned. It is not uncommon for children to double or triple scoop the product, with videos on platforms like Tik Tok and YouTube going viral glorifying such. A triple -shot of G FUEL could include up to 420mg of caffeine. 'It becomes easier for a kid to consume far more than they attempt,' Dr Ellen Rome, head of the Center for Adolescent Medicine at the Cleveland Clinic told DailyMail.com, comparing G FUEL to caffeine -packed drinks at Starbucks where there is an inherent price barrier to getting that much of the stimulant. Children under the age of 12 are not recommended by the the American Association of Pediatrics (AAP) to consume caffeine for any reason. A teenager is not to get more than 100mg each day. Caffeine can be harmful to a developing body. The stimulant is highly addicting and consumption in adolescence has been linked to attention issues, anxiety and can be life -threatening for children suffering from a chronic heart condition or high blood pressure. https://socialemotionaIpaws.com/biog-post-1/f/american- children-have-quietly-become-hooked-on-video-game-supple-1 I have written lengthy reports about esports being extremely harmful to child's mental health that falls under child abuse laws, yet we continue go blind with algorithms, visual violence, gambling, can't sleep, using red bull to awake the effects the health physically etc. Esports at third grade playing Minecraft goes against the U.S. Surgeon General REPORT. Esports programs expand across grade levels. Classroom More K-12 Schools Expand Esports to Middle and Younger Grades For junior high students, gaming can be a pipeline to varsity competition, scholarships and careers. School districts like Modesto City Schools and Palm Springs Unified in California are expanding esports programs across grade levels to engage students in teamwork, social -emotional learning and career exploration in fields like game design and video production. Districts are also incorporating esports into middle school programs and career and technical education pathways to foster skills that extend beyond gaming. Full Story: EdTech Magazine (10/8) https://socialemotionalpaws.com/blog-post-1 /f/esports-programs-expand-across- arade-levels s Study finds little evidence linking violent video games to increased aggression in adolescents. A longitudinal study of a large number of Czech adolescents found that individuals scoring higher on physical aggression tended to play video games that are a bit more violent. This was particularly the case among younger participants. However, the study did not find any evidence that changes in how much one plays violent video games had an impact on future physical aggression. The research was published in Computers in Human Behavior. Video games have become one of the most popular forms of entertainment worldwide. Over the past few decades, they have evolved from simple, pixelated programs into immersive, lifelike experiences, spanning a wide variety of genres. Today, nearly 3 billion people around the globe are active video game players. https://socialemotionalpaws.com/blog-post-1 /f/study-finds-little-evidence-Iinking- violent-video-aames-to-increa Next -Gen Education is Bringing Gaming to the Classroom. Long shunned by educators, gaming is increasingly being integrated into education, with games like League of Legends, Overwatch, Rocket League, and Fortnite being introduced to educational settings. In fact, establishing an esports- centered community in schools can help students align their passion with their academic and personal aspirations, fostering an environment where they can learn, grow, and embrace various facets of esports. Parents and educators often attribute the rise of violence and anti -social behavior to excessive gaming. In a 2020 Mott Poll Report in the US, it was reported that 86 percent of parents think their child wastes too much time playing video games. A recent study on the impact of gaming on children and adolescents in the Arab world found longer game time correlated with a higher risk of physical aggression and hostile behavior. https://socialemotionalpaws.com/blog-post-1/f/next-gent_ education -is -bringing -gaming -to -the -classroom Does violence in video games impact aggression and empathy? A longitudinal study of Czech adolescents to differentiate within- and between -person effects. The associations between exposure to violent video games (VVG) and aggression/empathy have been extensively studied. VVG are often depicted as triggers for increased aggression and decreased empathy in line with the General Aggression Model. However, longitudinal evidence that distinguishes within- and between -person effects and focuses on various dimensions of aggression/empathy remains scarce. Drawing on representative sample of 3010 9 Czech adolescents (aged 13-17), data were collected over four waves to measure physical and verbal aggression, and cognitive and affective empathy. VVG was evaluated based on open-ended responses. A random -intercept cross -lagged panel model was employed to differentiate within- and between -person associations. VVG positively correlated with cognitive empathy, verbal aggression, and physical aggression at the between -person level. https://socialemotionalpaws.com/blog-post-1 /f/does-violence-in-video-games- impact-aggression-and-empathy-a-Ion-1 The publishers of video games such games as Doom and Grand Theft Auto joined President Trump Thursday in a White House roundtable discussion about violent video games and whether they play a part in desensitizing some players and contribute to the likelihood they might commit violence. itttps:iisocialemotionalpaws.com/biog-post-lit°/these-are-the- video-games-the-white-house-played-in-its-meeting-o The following content may contain stories and references to predation and child abuse. Some readers may find this content triggering. We believe that parents are best -equipped to protect their children when they are aware of the potential risks children may face in online spaces. According to the FBI, as many as 500,000 predators are active online every day targeting kids ages 12 to 15. Their intentions include procuring sexual images from children and sometimes making physical contact with their victims. Video gaming platforms offer predators an opportune place to lure children. Kids may have their guard down when playing games, while predators make overtures of "friendship," sometimes pretending to be someone they are not. Any game where children can communicate with strangers presents risks. Predators can contact children in chat rooms (sometimes called lobbies) through written, verbal, or video means before or during a game. https://socialemotionalpaws.com/blog-post-1 /f/5-video-games-where-predators- target-kids BOWLING GREEN, Ky. - Sex offenders are using popular games like Fortnite or Minecraft to seduce children. It's become a serious 10 problem especially since gaming usage has skyrocketed during the pandemic. Just this month, Kentucky State Police arrested a man using PlayStation to solicit sex acts from children prompting News 40 to investigate. Observer Research Foundation data shows that since the pandemic began, online sexual abuse and exploitation of children has risen globally, in certain countries, up to 400 percent. https://socialemotionalpaws.com/blog-post-1 /f/online-child-abuse-triples-over- pandemic-pedophiles-using-gaming Online games are very popular, at least one person plays video games in two- thirds of American households, according to the Entertainment Software Association. Roughly 160 million American adults play internet-based games, one recent study estimates. The games can be very entertaining, and it may be easy to get absorbed in the competition, but can they be addictive? That is a question still being debated among researchers and health professionals, but early evidence suggests that videogames are one of the most addicting technologies around. In fact, new research shows that there are plenty of safe and effective treatments for videogame addiction already in use. Internet Gaming in DSM-5 Addiction to gaming is described in the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5-TR), which is used by mental health professionals to diagnose mental disorders. In the DSM-5-TR, the condition is referred to as Internet Gaming Disorder (IGD)(1). IGD is included in the section recommending conditions for further research, along with caffeine use disorder and other conditions. Internet Gaming Esports FBI's "Be Smart With Your Kids' Smartphone" program, which aims to help parents and educators understand potential threats that accompany cellphones and how to prevent online sexual predators and violent extremists from engaging their kids online. The Jacksonville Field Office's Child Exploitation Task Force and Community Outreach Unit started the outreach effort in 2018 and partner with local school districts to hold these public forums. https://socialemotionalpaws.com/blog-post-1 /f/child-sexual-abuse-material-in-the- world-dhs%E2%80%99s-campaign-to-help U.S. Surgeon General Wants To Treat Social Media Like Cigarettes By Adding Warning Labels. 11 Social media seemed poised to permanently alter the way humans communicate when it started to gain steam a couple of decades ago, and while it's definitely lived up to that promise, whether or not it's changed the world for the better is a topic that is very much up for debate. https://socialemotionalpaws.com/blog-post- 1 /f/us-surgeon-general-wants-to-treat-social-media-I ike-cigarettes America's Top Doctor on Why He Wants Warning Labels on Social Media. https://socialemotionalpaws.com/blog-post-1 /f/us-surgeon-general-wants-to-treat- social-media-I ike-cigarettes What is Video Gaming Addiction? And How to Prevent it? Video game addiction emerges as a compelling topic in the realm of psychological studies and public discourse. Recognized by the World Health Organization as "Gaming Disorder," this behavioral addiction manifests through persistent or recurrent gaming behavior, both online and offline. The individual exhibits impaired control over gaming activities, prioritizes gaming over other life interests and daily activities, and continues gaming despite the occurrence of negative consequences. https://socialemotionalpaws.com/blog-post-1/f/us- surgeon-general-wants-to-treat-social-media-like-cigarettes From Little Garners to College Garners: Reversing the Long -Term Consequences of Early Gaming Dependency In today's episode, join Melanie Hempe as she reviews an often -overlooked long- term consequence of childhood gaming dependency: failure to thrive in college. Melanie shares warning signs and offers practical tips for both parents and teenagers to address and reverse these issues effectively. https://socialemotionalpaws.com/blog-post-1 /f/from-little-gamers-to-college- gamers-reversi ng-the-long-term-con Today, Melanie is joined by Glow Kids author Nicholas Kardaras to discuss his experience with treating video game addiction & social media dependency, as well as discussing childhood brain development. Check out Dr. Kardaras's NEW book 'Digital Madness: How Social Media Is Driving Our Mental Health Crisis —and How to Restore Our 12 Sanity.' https://socialemotionalpaws.com/blog-post-1/f/from-little-gamers-to- col lege-gamers-reversing-the-long-term-con Video Game Addiction: ScreenStrong's Founding Story (#113) Video Game Addiction: Foundina Story Today, Melanie is joined by Dr. Brett Kennedy, co -director of the Digital Media Treatment & Education Center and a Licensed Clinical Psychologist with over 20 years of experience working with adolescents, adults, and couples. Dr. Kennedy and Melanie discuss the history of video games, how video games specifically meet boys' needs, and tips for helping your son through a video game detox. Video Game Addiction & Treatment with Dr. Brett Kennedv Every organization has a founding story, and ScreenStrong is no different. Today we will hear Melanie give a detailed account of her family's struggle with video game addiction —in the form of her oldest son, Adam. https://socialemotionalpaws.com/blog-post-1/f/video-game-addiction- screen-strongs-founding-story The publishers of video games such games as Doom and Grand Theft Auto joined President Trump Thursday in a White House roundtable discussion about violent video games and whether they play a part in desensitizing some players and contribute to the likelihood they might commit violence. Thursday's meeting was part of the president's response to last month's shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Fla., in which 17 were killed. Trump has made a range of remarks as Democratic and some Republican lawmakers call for more gun control, suggesting he would take guns away from mentally ill people — with or without a court order — and supported arming teachers. He also criticized violence in video games, as well as in movies and online. "I'm hearing more and more people say the level of violence on video games is really shaping young people's thoughts," he said during a meeting about school safety with local and state officials. In the meeting Thursday afternoon, the president said some studies have indicated shown a correlation between video game violence and real violence, the White House said Thursday. No reporters were allowed in the meeting. 13 https://www.AooAle.com/search?q=Doom+and+Grand+Theft+Auto+joined+Preside nt+Trump+Thursday+in+a+White+House+roundtable+discussion+about+violent+vi deo+aames&riz=1 C1 ONGR enUS1178US1178&oa=Doom+and+Grand+Theft+Auto+ joined+President+Trump+Thursday+in+a+White+House+roundtable+discussion+ab out+violent+video+games&gs icrp=EgZjaHJvbWUyBggAEEUYOdIBCDE0OTdgMGo 3aAlAsAIA&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8 During the meeting, a short video was played showing some violent imagery from video games such as Call of Duty, Fallout and Wolfenstein. The clips, since posted on the White House YouTube channel, "appear to be ripped from YouTubers' footage of the game as well as from the gaming outlet Giant Bomb," reported video game news site Kotaku. https:iisoc alemotionalpaws.com/blog-post-1/f/risks-of-childrens-addiction-to- electronic-qames-from-a-social The U.K. may ban sales of energy drinks to kids under 16. Many want the U.S. to do the same. As purchases of energy drinks have skyrocketed, so have concerns about their possible health effects, particularly on children. The U.K. may ban sales of energy drinks to kids under 16. Many wa https://socialemotionalpaws.com/blog-post-1 /f/surgeons-are-telling-men-to-quit- enerqv-drinks%E2%80%A6-because-studies-s Child gamers are being flogged powerful stimulants with more than two times the amount of caffeine as a can of Red Bull. The supplements promise 'laser focus' during marathon all-night gaming sessions and are hugely popular with young teenagers. https://socialemotionalpaws.com/blog-post-1 /f/children-are-fueling-marathon- gaming-sessions-with-dangerous-st Energy drinks sold to under-16s despite supermarket ban. High -caffeine canned energy drinks are being sold in supermarkets despite a ban, a BBC investigation has found Sales of the drinks to children under 16 have been voluntarily banned by most major UK stores since March. https://socialemotionalpaws.com/bloA-post-1 /f/children-are-fueling-marathon- gaming-sessions-with-dangerous-st Are esports bettors a new generation of harmed gamblers? 14 Being an esports bettor significantly predicted greater problem gambling severity and gambling -related harms. More frequent esports skin betting and skin gambling (on games of chance) were significant predictors of gambling problems amongst esports bettors. https://socialemotionalpaws.com/blog-post-1/f/are- esports-bettors-a-new-generation-of-harmed-gamblers-a-com par The United States Surgeon General, Dr. C. Everett Koop, said today that video games might be hazardous to the health of young people, who, he said, are becoming addicted to the machines "body and soul." Dr. Koop, formerly a Philadelphia pediatric surgeon, said that "more and more people are beginning to understand" the adverse mental and physical effects of video games. At the Western Psychiatric Institute and Clinic, Dr. Koop said he had no scientific evidence on the effect of video games on children, but he predicted statistical evidence would be forthcoming soon from the health care fields. https://socialemotionalpaws.comibiog-post-1/f/around-the- nation-surgeon-general-sees-danger-in-video-games https://www.nytimes.com/1982/11 /10/us/around-the-nation-surgeon-general-sees- danger-in-video-games.html Esports is not a sport creates addiction, mental illness, school introduces this in their districts without sound duty of care thus can generate violence, ect. https://socialemotionalpaws.com/blog-post-1 /f/esports-is-not-a-sport-creates- addiction-mental-illness-school Welfare and Institutions Code section 300 The child is suffering serious emotional damage, or is at substantial risk of suffering serious emotional damage, evidenced by severe anxiety, depression, withdrawal, or untoward aggressive behavior toward self or others, as a result of the conduct of the parent or guardian or who has no parent or guardian capable of providing appropriate care. A child shall not be found to be a person described by this subdivision if the willful failure of the parent or guardian to provide adequate mental health treatment is based on a sincerely held religious belief and if a less intrusive judicial intervention is available. https://socialemotionalpaws.com/blog-post-1 /f/ca-welf-inst-code-section-300 15 https://socialemotionalpaws.com/blog-post-1 /f/risks-of-childrens-addiction-to- electronic-aames-from-a-social https://socialemotionalpaws.com/blog-post-1 /f/esports-brings-violence-schools- have-as-education-screentimecd This condition can include gaming on the internet or any electronic device, but most people who develop significant gaming issues mainly play on the internet. Whether internet and video gaming addiction should be classified as an addiction or mental illness is debated among researchers. Many researchers consider video game addiction a behavioral addiction similar to gambling disorder, in which the rush of winning becomes one of the main reasons for playing. Others think this comparison to gambling is flawed because there may not be financial or material losses involved with playing video games. In addition, winning a video game may require cognitive skills and sharp reflexes, while winning at gambling is mainly a matter of chance. https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/diseases/23124-video-game-addiction Who does video game addiction affect? Video game addiction can affect children, teens and adults, although adults are most likely to have this condition. How common is video game addiction? Researchers estimate that video game addiction affects between 1.7% and 10% of the U.S. population. The estimated range is large because many researchers disagree on the diagnostic criteria for internet gaming disorder. https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/diseases/23124-video-game-addiction Australia asks Roblox, Minecraft to detail child safety measures The state superintendent has limited authority over school districts, which are locally managed. The officeholder instead manages the California Department of Education. This agency guides local school districts and also provides partial oversight. The state superintendent also typically takes advantage of the bully pulpit on education issues. 16 The office has an uncertain future because Gov. Gavin Newsom is pushing a proposal to reimagine the office and redistribute some of its duties. Shaw and Barrera advance to run-off for state schools superintend Mental health and well-being in esports: A scoping review , (2) synthesise findings on mental health and well-being outcomes and (3) identify gaps to guide future research and practice. A systematic search identified 10,348 records, of which 89 studies met the inclusion criteria. Results reveal a nuanced picture in which indicators of mental well-being, such as intrinsic motivation, self -efficacy and psychosocial skills, can coexist with mental ill -health symptoms, including anxiety and gaming addiction. Prevalence estimates varied widely, with anxiety reported in 38%-82% of players and depressive symptoms in 25%-37%. These outcomes appear to vary depending on factors such as player experience, coping strategies and the competitive environment, highlighting how indicators of well-being (e.g., motivation and confidence) can co-occur with symptoms of distress (e.g., anxiety), reflecting the dynamic nature of mental health in esports. https://iaap- journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/l 0.111 1/apps.70055 Mental health and well-being in esports: A scoping review Gambling addiction is one of the behavioral and conduct -based dependencies included in the DSM-5 and is recognized as a global challenge [4]. Gambling and games such as dice and playing cards are considered to have a close relationship [29]. 4.1. Gaming Disorder and Symptoms Recognized by the WHO and APA The MHLW Japan defines dependency as "A state of being captivated by something specific and wanting to quit, but not being able to." Dependency is classified into two categories (Figure 5). The first type of addiction is a state of being in a situation where things cannot be consumed or experienced in moderation and is related to substance use. The second type of addiction is a state of being too absorbed in a particular act or process and falling into a situation where nothing else can be carried out. Gaming disorder is an addiction owing to the act of immersing oneself in the game and falls under the second type of addiction. With the popularization of the internet and smartphones, internet and gaming addiction have become significant problems [4]. Therefore, countermeasures from the medical field are required. 17 U.S. Congressional Legislation on E-Sports and Gambling Addictions in Schools There is no current federal law in the U.S. Congress that specifically addresses e-sports addiction in schools. The legislative focus in recent years has been on problem gambling, especially in the context of legalized sports betting, rather than on e-sports or gaming addiction in educational settings. Related Federal Gambling Addiction Bills Several bills introduced in Congress aim to address the broader public health crisis of gambling addiction, which could indirectly affect youth exposed to gambling through e-sports or other platforms: SAFE Bet Act (H.R. 9590) - Introduced in September 2024, this is the first comprehensive federal bill to set "minimum federal standards" for states offering sports betting. It would require states to meet federal standards on advertising, affordability, and Al use, and could apply to online betting platforms that might be linked to e-sports betting gamblingharm.org. GRIT Act (S. 3579 / H.R. 6982) - Introduced by Sen. Blumenthal and Rep. Salinas, this bill would dedicate 50% of the federal sports excise tax to gambling addiction treatment and research, with 75% going to states and 25% to the National Institute on Drug Abuse. It does not raise taxes but would fund prevention, treatment, and research for problem gambling National Council on Problem Gambling+1. POINTS Act (H.R. 1000) - Introduced in March 2026, this bipartisan bill would redirect a share of existing sports wagering tax revenue toward prevention, screening, intervention, and treatment programs for gambling addiction, without creating new taxes ReadWrite. Why E-Sports Addictions Are Not a Current Legislative Priority While e-sports and gaming are growing, U.S. federal policy has not yet targeted "gaming addiction" in schools. The focus has been on problem gambling because: Legalized sports betting is widespread (30+ states allow online betting) gamblingharm.org. Gambling addiction rates are high among bettors, with 40-50% experiencing problems gamblingharm.org. 18 Federal excise tax revenue from sports wagering is substantial, creating a funding stream for treatment National Council on Problem Gambling. Possible Legislative Pathways If e-sports addiction in schools becomes a more pressing public health concern, lawmakers could: Adapt existing gambling addiction frameworks to include video game and e-sports use. Introduce school -specific provisions in education or public health bills. Partner with state and local governments to address youth gaming habits. In summary: As of now, U.S. Congress has no law on e-sports addiction in schools, but related gambling addiction bills like the SAFE Bet Act, GRIT Act, and POINTS Act could be adapted to address broader gaming and e-sports risks if public health concerns grow gamblingharm.org+3. Why E-Sports Are Not Regulated as Gambling E-sports are generally considered competitive video gaming rather than gambling, so they fall outside the scope of existing problem gambling laws. However, if e-sports were to be commercialized (e.g., betting on matches), states with responsible gaming frameworks could apply similar safeguards. Possible Legislative Directions While no state has yet addressed e-sports addictions in schools, lawmakers could draw from: Problem gambling prevention statutes (e.g., Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York) that require operators to provide self -exclusion options and educational materials. School -based mental health and technology use policies that address screen time, online behavior, and addiction risks. Federal guidance from the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) on digital addiction prevention. Bottom Line 19 As of now, no U.S. state has passed legislation specifically targeting e-sports addictions in schools. Current laws focus on gambling and problem -gambling prevention, not e-sports. Any future regulation would likely emerge from broader mental health, technology use, or gambling prevention frameworks, rather than a dedicated e-sports addiction law. The American Psychiatric Association classifies compulsive gaming under Internet Gaming Disorder (IGD) in the DSM-5, categorizing it as a "condition for further study" rather than a standalone official diagnosis. The Los Angeles Times has covered this topic multiple times, discussing both the psychiatric debate and the gaming industry's pushback. [1, 2] Notable Los Angeles Times coverage includes: • The Clinical Debate: When the World Health Organization (WHO) officially recognized "gaming disorder" as a mental health condition, the LA Times Compulsive video -game playing could be mental health... detailed the international milestone and the implications for behavioral health. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5] • Academic Pushback: The LA Times reported on backlash from local researchers, including scholars at UC Irvine, who objected to categorizing gaming as an illness, arguing it could unfairly pathologize normal hobbyist behavior UC Irvine objects to WHO's plan to classify `gaming disorder' as a. [1, 2] • Industry Stance: Early LA Times reporting on the APA's initial inclusion of the condition highlighted how trade groups and the video game industry Gaming junkies get no diagnosis - Los Angeles Times warned against prematurely labeling gaming habits as an addiction. [1] For further guidance, could you tell me what specific aspect of the DSM-5 criteria or esports culture interests you (e.g., diagnosis symptoms, competitive stress vs. addiction)? I can help find more focused information for you. 2 8 sites • (Internet) Gaming Disorder in DSM-5 and ICD-11: A Case of... - PMC - NIH In 2013, Internet gaming disorder (IGD) was included in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) as a con... National Institutes of Health (.gov) • Internet Gaming - American Psychiatric Association Addiction to gaming is described in the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders 20 Psychiatry.org • UC Irvine academics come to the defense of players after ... Feb 8, 2018 — Is excess gaming a mental disorder? UCI fights back, saying it's unfair to gaming world. 0 Los Angeles Times Show all This is for informational purposes only. For medical advice or diagnosis, consult a professional. Al responses may include mistakes. Learn more https://www.google.com/search?q=Ios+angles+time+news+story+e- sports+dms+5+disorder&riz=1 C1 ONGRenUS1178US1178&oq=los+angles+time+n ews+story+e- sports+dms+5+disorder&gs lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUyBggAEEUYOTIJCAEQIRAKGKAB MgklAhAhGAoYoAEYBwgDECEYjwLSAQgyMzlwajBgN6gCALACAA&sourceid=chro me&ie=UTF-8 Like Dislike South Korea's Struggle to "Unplug" — Energy, Politics, and Social Isolation South Korea is grappling with multiple "inability to unplug" challenges — from being tethered to fossil fuels in its energy system to political gridlock and a surge in socially withdrawn youth. Energy dependency and the "power trilemma" The country's heavy reliance on fossil fuels — 58.5% of its power mix in 2023, with 26.8% from LNG — has left it vulnerable to global price shocks. The Russia - Ukraine war in 2022 spiked LNG costs, pushing up wholesale electricity prices and forcing state -run utility KEPCO to sell at regulated rates that didn't cover fuel costs. This created a "vicious cycle" of debt, bond issuance, and political pressure to keep tariffs low, while slow renewable adoption missed opportunities to cut prices and reduce environmental costs ieefa.org. The result is a power tariff trilemma: balancing energy security, competitiveness, and sustainability. 21 Political polarization and governance paralysis In late 2024, President Yoon Suk-yeol's attempted martial law and subsequent impeachment exposed deep societal divisions. The crisis revealed a political system where centralization of power and factionalism persist, even as civil society mobilizes. This instability has delayed policy reforms, including those needed to diversify energy sources and address social issues East Asia Forum+1. Social isolation among youth Parallel to political and energy struggles, South Korea is facing a "silent crisis" of extreme social withdrawal. Around 540,000 young people aged 19-34 are socially and economically inactive, often confined to their homes for years. Causes are varied — from childhood trauma and depression to unemployment and "just taking a break" — with 45.6% citing "other" reasons The Korea Times. This phenomenon, akin to Japan's hikikomori, reflects a broader societal inability to "unplug" from isolation, mirroring the energy sector's inability to disconnect from fossil fuel dependence. Interconnected challenges These issues are linked: economic stress from high energy costs and political instability can exacerbate youth unemployment and mental health struggles, while social withdrawal may further erode civic engagement and political participation. Addressing them requires coordinated action — diversifying energy sources, reforming regulated markets, and expanding support for reintegration programs — to help South Korea "unplug" from its current constraints and build a more resilient, inclusive society. South Korea wrestles with inability to unplug - SPa rr_h The growing popularity of esports has sparked interest in understanding how esports participation might pose unique mental health challenges and opportunities for players. To address this, this scoping review aimed to systematically map mental health and well-being research in esports. Specifically, we sought to (1) describe the methodological characteristics of existing studies, (2) synthesise findings on mental health and well-being outcomes and (3) identify gaps to guide future research and practice. A systematic search identified 10,348 records, of which 89 studies met the inclusion criteria. Results reveal a nuanced picture in which indicators of mental well-being, such as intrinsic motivation, self -efficacy and psychosocial skills, can coexist with mental ill -health symptoms, including anxiety and gaming addiction. 22 Prevalence estimates varied widely, with anxiety reported in 38%-82% of players and depressive symptoms in 25%-37%. These outcomes appear to vary depending on factors such as player experience, coping strategies and the competitive environment, highlighting how indicators of well-being (e.g., motivation and confidence) can co-occur with symptoms of distress (e.g., anxiety), reflecting the dynamic nature of mental health in esports. While research in this area has recently proliferated, the majority of studies were cross -sectional (56.2%), with only 6.7% longitudinal and 4.5% intervention based. Significant gaps remain, including methodological inconsistencies, a lack of longitudinal and intervention studies and limited inclusion of diverse populations (e.g., various genders, geographical location and competitive settings). This review underscores the need for standardised measurement tools to accurately ascertain the prevalence, severity and nature of mental health challenges in esports. There is also a need for gender -balanced samples and tailored mental health frameworks that reflect the unique pressures of this population, such as performance demands, digital toxicity and irregular schedules. Future research should develop and evaluate evidence -based interventions and organisational policies aimed at safeguarding player well-being. I Used to Let My Kids Play Video Games Freely, But These 15 Facts Made Me Rethink I Used to Let My Kids Play Video Games Freely, But These 15 Facts Made Me Rethink© JJFarq/Shutterstock.com I'll admit it. I'm a parent who used to let my children spend their lives in front of the TV. Yes, I used to let my kids play video games freely, and for a while, everything seemed to be okay, but then I started to do some research. I began to realize that there are many downsides to long gaming sessions, especially if they happen day after day. In this article, you will see the many negative side effects that can occur when your child is addicted to video games. Many of these facts will be startling, but that's the point. As a parent, you need to know how to keep your kids safe in every way, even when they're having fun. Heed these tips for a well-rounded child. Your Student May Have Issues in School 23 According to research, your child could perform poorly in school if they spend an excessive amount of time in front of the screen playing games.ln this study, they found that less screen time resulted in better scores in math. Also, more time spent outside playing meant that the kids did better ingymand other physical classes. Keep that in mind. A solution may be to allow video games only during the weekend. They Could Learn Toxic Behavior During the 1990s, it was popular for politicians to talk about how dangerous video games were because they would make kids act out violently. While the jury is still out on that, there is the possibility that kids could be exposed to toxic environments. Some video games, like Grand Theft Auto, are full of violence, language, and tough characters. It is possible that your child could model their behavior after those characters. Just be watchful. https://socialemotionalpaws.com/blog-post-1 /f/i-used-to-let-my-kids-play-video- pames-freely-but-these-15-facts Gaming, Social Media and Mental Wellness Presentation: Presented by Hoag ASPIRE Intensi... The World Health Organization recently recognized "gaming disorder" as a diagnosable condition. Excessive gaming and focus on social media can cause psychological effects such as irritability, depression, isolation and anxiety. Explore the impact tech... https://tv.iusd.org/search?keyword=video%20games&fields=tags&pageContext=e- tag-search The state superintendent has limited authority over school districts, which are locally managed. The officeholder instead manages the California Department of Education. This agency guides local school districts and also provides partial oversight. The state superintendent also typically takes advantage of the bully pulpit on education issues. The office has an uncertain future because Gov. Gavin Newsom is pushing a proposal to reimagine the office and redistribute some of its duties. Shaw and Barrera advance to run-off for state schools superintend Parents are typically asked to sign paperwork at enrollment granting consent for the schools to give their kids laptops. Nicki Petrossi said when she initially refused to sign it in 2024, the school district in Fullerton, California, told her that 24 she was legally barred from doing so. According to a letter the district provided her, reviewed by NBC News, administrators argued state rules require children to use computers if that's how the school is teaching a curriculum. A spokesperson for the California Department of Education said "how a district implements the state -adopted standards is up to the district." The district did not respond to a request for comment. But Petrossi was certain she needed to get her children back on an analog education, Parents are opting kids out of school laptops, returning them to I had no idea this Fortnite lawsuit was even a thing... If you know someone who plays Fortnite, send them this https://www.facebook.com/reel/808854095491870/?fs=e&m i bexti d=wwX lfr&fs=e The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the Office of the Surgeon General issued an advisory warning that excessive screen time —ranging from social media scrolling to gaming —is a severe public health concern linked to poor sleep, mental health challenges, and weakened in -person relationships. Recommended Screen Time Limits Health officials outline specific age -based guidelines to protect cognitive and physical health: Under 18 months: Zero screen time (except for video chatting).Ages under 6: Less than 1 hour per day. Ages 6 to 18: Maximum of 2 hours of recreational screen time per day. The "5 Ds" Framework The advisory introduces five practical strategies for parents and youth to manage technology use: Discuss: Talk openly about the risks and benefits of digital media. Do: Establish boundaries like screen -free meals and device -free bedrooms. Delay: Postpone access to social media and personal devices when possible. Divert: Encourage offline hobbies, extracurriculars, and outdoor activities. Disconnect: Power off devices to ensure uninterrupted sleep. To read the full 43-page federal document, review the HHS Surgeon General's Advisory. If you want to create a tailored plan for your family, tell me: What ages are your children? About how many hours a day do they currently use screens? Is it mostly for social media, gaming, or videos? I can help suggest specific strategies to scale back their usage 25 Health officials in the Trump administration have issued an advisory about children and adolescents' excessive screen time, warning that negative impacts on sleep and mental functioning have "become a public health concern". The advisory from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) notes that the amount of screen time reaches an average of four or more hours per day by the time a child becomes a teenager and can be linked to poor sleep, decreased functioning in school, less physical activity and weakened in -person relationships. "A concern at all stages of life, and a particularly important one around children's screen exposure, is its potential to disrupt healthy sleep, which is fundamental to learning, mood, behavior, physical health, and overall development," the report says. Trump health officials issue advisory on children and teens' excessive screen time I TrumD administration I The Guardian Extreme Minecraft makeover Elementary-, middle -school esports teams help contractor with renovation Students from Athens-Chilesburg Elementary and Leestown Middle School in Kentucky participated in "LEXtreme Makeover," a series of build challenges in Minecraft Education, through a partnership between Boone Contracting and the district's esports program. The final challenge, "Rickhouse to Penthouse," involved transforming a historic distillery into an accessible apartment complex. Boone Contracting funded custom trophies for students and provided feedback on their designs. Tell a Friend I SmartBrief Gaming & Careers Southern U. program guides students to esports careers Southern University has launched the Esports and Digital Gaming Ecosystem program to prepare students for careers in game development, production, broadcasting, content creation and emerging technologies in response to the growth of the gaming industry. The program aims to address the representation gap in the gaming and tech workforce, where African Americans make up only 4% to 5% despite being 12% of video game players. Full Story: The Times -Picayune I The New Orleans Advocate (6/7) share -text Tell a Friend I SmartBrief Teaching & Coaching 26 Ga. Teacher of the Year finalist is also an esports coach High-school math teacher Amanda Dillard, a top 10 finalist for Georgia's Teacher of the Year, is dedicated to students in the classroom and the esports arena, where she serves as the team's coach. Students describe her as kind, supportive and always ready to help, noting that she transforms timid freshmen into confident seniors. Full Story: CBS News (6/8) Tell a Friend I SmartBrief share -text Inside the classroom with Cobb County School District's Teacher of the Year Amanda Dillard When you walk through the hallways of Pope High School, it won't take long to realize that math teacher Amanda Dillard is a beloved fixture. In fact, around school, she is known as "kind of a big Dill." Her reputation as an academic codebreaker, a master of patience, and a champion of student potential is a major reason she was recently named the Cobb County School District's Teacher of the Year. She was also recognized on the state level as a top ten finalist for Georgia's Teacher of the Year. Dillard is an interrelated special education teacher; the secret to her success comes down to flexibility and a few good "hacks." Her students, including Ashley Rueckel and Alyssa Cain, say Dillard has an incredible knack for helping them grasp complex curriculum. Rueckel and Cain noted that if a student does not understand the original lesson plan, Dillard steps in with alternative teaching methods and clever ways to make the concepts stick. httas://www.cbsnews.com/atianta/news/inside-the-classroom-with-cobb-coun school-districts-teacher-of-the-year-amanda-di I lard/ Wellness & Research Negative parenting raises gaming disorder in kids with ADHD Children ages 9 to 12 with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder had a 20% higher risk of internet gaming disorder, compared with younger children, if they were exposed to negative parenting behaviors, according to a study presented at 27 the Pediatric Academic Societies annual meeting. Data showed boys had twice the risk of girls of developing a gaming disorder. Full Story: Healio (free registration) (6/5) share -text Tell a Friend I SmartBrief Study links negative parenting behaviors to gaming disorder in kids with ADHD Children with ADHD have a greater risk for developing internet gaming disorder. High rates of negative parenting behaviors increased their risk for internet gaming disorder by nearly 3 times. BOSTON — Negative parenting behaviors may increase the likelihood that children with ADHD will develop internet gaming disorder, according to a study presented at the Pediatric Academic Societies Annual Meeting. Perspective from Serena M. King, PhD An estimated 80% to 90% of children in the United States play video games, many starting in toddlerhood, according to Emily Wassmer, MD, IBCLC, a developmental and behavioral pediatrics fellow at Children's Hospital of Philadelphia. In addition, she said data suggest that 3% to 8% of children meet the criteria for internet gaming disorder. Study links negative parenting behaviors to gaming disorder in kids with ADHD Arenas, Programs, Coaches & Conferences Minn. high schools formalize new esports program to start this fall WWJO-FM (St. Cloud, Minn.) (6/3) Minnesota High Schools Launch Esports Program For 2026-2027 Nev. school's inaugural, regional esports tournament becomes family affair The Fallon Post (Nev.) (6/5) Inaugural Esports Tournament Draws Competitors From Across Region College's new university esports facility features Extron tech Installation (6/4) Extron tech supports new university esports facility - Installation NASEF Mf'YMORK OF ACADEMIC AND SS:ML"TIC E3P@F7Tk FE EIIATIONS, Game. Gnaw. Leam. Lead. 28 Yes, U.S. Surgeon General Dr. Vivek Murthy has explicitly stated that 13 is too young for children to be on social media platforms. While most platforms currently allow children to create accounts at this age, his Social Media and Youth Mental Health Advisory warns that early adolescents are still developing their identity and self-worth, making them highly vulnerable to the distorted environment of social media. The Surgeon General's guidance and broader recommendations focus on minimizing these risks: Developmental Vulnerability: Brain development continues well into young adulthood, and the critical period of early adolescence makes 13-year-olds highly susceptible to peer pressure, social comparison, and exposure to extreme or harmful content. Mental Health Risks: Excessive use and exposure have been tied to body dissatisfaction, disordered eating behaviors, and low self-esteem. Call for Action: The Surgeon General has urged lawmakers and tech companies to enforce stricter age limits, implement robust safety features, and provide parents with better tools to protect their children. You can review the full U.S. Surgeon General's Advisory for a complete look at the scientific evidence and recommendations regarding youth well-being. Would you like to know more about: Tips for setting healthy screen time limits for your children? How to talk to your kids about the risks associated with social media? Age -appropriate alternatives or monitored digital spaces? Social Media and Youth Mental Health: The U.S. Surgeon General's Advisory [Internet] Office of the Surgeon General (OSG) Washington (DC): US Department of Health and Human Services; 2023. Publications and Reports of the Surgeon General. PMID: 37721985 Bookshelf ID: NBK594761 Free Books & Documents Excerpt Social media use by youth is nearly universal. Up to 95% of youth ages 13-17 report using a social media platform, with more than a third saying they use social media "almost constantly." Although age 13 is commonly the required minimum age used by social media platforms in the U.S., nearly 40% of children ages 8-12 use social media. Despite this widespread use among children and adolescents, robust independent safety analyses on the impact of social media on youth have not yet been conducted. There are increasing concerns among researchers, parents and caregivers, young people, healthcare experts, and others about the impact of social media on youth mental health. https://pubmed.ncbi.nim.nih.gov/37721985/ 29 PubMed Disclaimer Sections About the Advisory Social Media and Youth Mental Health Social Media Has Both Positive and Negative Impacts on Children and Adolescents What Drives Mental Health and Well -Being Concerns: A Snapshot of the Scientific Evidence Critical Questions Remain Unanswered We Must Take Action: A Way Forward Acknowledgments Endnotes Similar articles Factors that affect clinical youth engagement in digital mental health research: a qualitative sub -study nested within a prospective cohort study. Bye A, Wilson-Lemoine E, Trevillion K, Carter B, Dutta R. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2025 Apr 30;25(1):118. doi: 10.1186/s12874-025-02571-9. PMID: 40307751 Free PMC article. Google for Sexual Relationships: Mixed -Methods Study on Digital Flirting and Online Dating Among Adolescent Youth and Young Adults. Lykens J, Pilloton M, Silva C, Schlamm E, Wilburn K, Pence E. JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2019 May 16;5(2):e10695. doi: 10.2196/10695. PMID: 31099335Free PMC article. Parental Attitudes on Social Media Monitoring for Youth: Cross -Sectional Survey Study. Cohen A, Bendelow A, Smith T, Cicchetti C, Davis MM, Heffernan M. JMIR Pediatr Parent. 2023 Nov 16;6:e46365. doi: 10.2196/46365. PMID: 37976085Free PMC article. Digital Platform Uses for Help and Support Seeking of Parents With Children Affected by Disabilities: Scoping Review. Gruebner O, van Haasteren A, Hug A, Elayan S, Sykora M, Albanese E, Naslund J, Wolf M, Fadda M, von Rhein M. J Med Internet Res. 2022 Dec 6;24(12):e37972. doi: 10.2196/37972. PMID: 36472896Free PMC article. Social Media Use and Health and Well-being of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer Youth: Systematic Review. Berger MN, Taba M, Marino JL, Lim MSC, Skinner SR. J Med Internet Res. 2022 Sep 21;24(9):e38449. doi: 10.2196/38449. PMID: 36129741 Free PMC article. 30 See all similar articles Publication types Review Related information Cited in Books GEO Profiles MedGen LinkOut - more resources Full Text Sources NCBI Bookshelf https://www.google.com/search?q=Yes%2C+U.S.+Surgeon+General+Dr.+Vivek+Mu rthy+has+explicitly+stated+that+13+is+too+young+for+children&riz=1 C1 ONGR_en US1178US1178&oq=Yes%2C+U.S.+Surgeon+General+Dr. +Vivek+Murthy+has+expl icitly+stated+that+13+is+too+young+for+children&gs_Icrp=EgZjaHJvbWUyBggAE EUYOdIBCDE1 MzZgMGo3gAlAsAIA&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8 Ten -year -old garners flagged to anti -terror police Children as young as 10 are in the Government's counter -terror scheme Prevent, one of the UK's most senior police officers has disclosed. Assistant Commissioner Laurence Taylor, Britain's head of counter -terrorism, warned that young people are increasingly being targeted by extremists on gaming platforms online, where they can be groomed and radicalised. During a meeting of the Five Eyes intelligence -sharing alliance, Mr Taylor revealed that some 20 per cent of terror suspects arrested in the UK were children. Mr Taylor said the ages of criminals committing violent, terrorist or sexual offences were getting younger and younger."We arrested 40 children for terrorism related offences in the UK. That is one in five of our arrests. Ten years ago that was one in 20," Mr Taylor told his counterparts from the United States, Canada, Australia and New Zealand."We have 10-year-olds in our Prevent programme. There are some really worrying statistics and it is incumbent on all of us - and it is not unique to the United Kingdom - to do everything we can to tackle that." Nearly 3,000 of those referred to Prevent said they had been radicalised by terrorists while playing video games online, Mr Taylor said.Nihilist terror organisations such as 764, a satanic online group whose members prey on vulnerable children online and blackmail them into sending explicit pictures or self -harm, are also on the rise, the alliance warned. 31 Graeme Biggar, the director-general of the National Crime Agency (NCA), said the UK's impending social media ban aims to reduce child abuse, but tech companies must tighten their age verification requirements. At the meeting, Mr Biggar added that pedophiles are increasingly using the open web rather than the dark web to abuse children, because it affords them greater anonymity. According to NCA statistics, approximately 1,000 suspected pedophiles' are arrested every month by UK police. Mr Biggar said: "We are seeing children appear in our casework at younger and younger ages. We had a case come across our desk this week of 8-year-olds being groomed online through gaming platforms. Sadly, that is not unusual. "We had to arrest, sadly, a 15-year-old a few weeks ago for attempting to import a firearm. We have trials under way, or starting soon, into people who are alleged to have committed cyber offences who were teenagers when they were doing it. "The vast majority of the time this is children as victims, but we are also seeing it as perpetrators, and those ages are getting younger and younger and we have multiple examples of that happening." Gangs in the UK are also increasingly using children to carry out extreme violence, a method known in police circles as "violence as a service". It is widely used by crime syndicates in the Netherlands, Belgium and Sweden for assassinations. Giving children smartphones is like handing them grenades Andrew Bailey, the co -deputy director of the FBI, pointed to the "supercharged" effect of Al on cyber crime. Scam compounds in South-east Asia, which use human slaves to defraud victims across the Western world, are presenting an unparalleled threat, he said. "That is an area where Al is leveraged by the criminals to rip off people to the tune of tens of billion dollars a year," Mr Bailey said. "This is fraud on an industrial scale. The mafia of the 1970s and 1980s would have envied the level of infrastructure that these enterprises have." Krissy Barrett, the commissioner of the Australian Federal Police, whose country recently banned social media for under-16s, described online harms against children as an "epidemic". "Our kids are at a crossroads, and the tech companies can be the digital penicillin of our time," she said. "This is an epidemic - let's not sugarcoat it." Ten -year -old gamers flagged to anti -terror police UK Flags 10-Year-Old Garners to Counter -Terror Police 32 Senior UK counter -terrorism officials have revealed that children as young as 10 are being flagged to the government's Prevent programme after being targeted by extremists on gaming platforms The Telegraph. Assistant Commissioner Laurence Taylor, head of counter -terrorism, told counterparts from the US, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand that around 20% of terror suspects arrested in the UK are children, up from one in 20 a decade ago. He said UK police have arrested 40 children for terrorism -related offences — one in five of all arrests — and that 10-year-olds are now part of the Prevent programme The Telegraph. Taylor warned that young people are increasingly being groomed and radicalised online, particularly through video games. Nearly 3,000 people referred to Prevent said they had been radicalised by terrorists while playing online games The Telegraph. He cited the rise of nihilist terror groups such as the satanic online network 764, which preys on vulnerable children, blackmails them, and pressures them into sending explicit images or engaging in self -harm The Telegraph. Graeme Biggar, director-general of the UK's National Crime Agency, said the government's planned social media ban aims to reduce child abuse, but tech companies must tighten age verification. He also noted that paedophiles are increasingly using the open web rather than the dark web to abuse children, exploiting greater anonymity The Telegraph. According to NCA statistics, about 1,000 suspected paedophiles are arrested monthly in the UK, and cases are being reported at younger and younger ages — including an 8-year-old groomed online through gaming platforms The Telegraph. The UK's Five Eyes intelligence partners are urging all member countries to do more to tackle online radicalisation among children, especially in gaming communities, where extremist content and grooming can spread quickly. The Telegraph Whv Screens Are Changing the Classroom: What Parents Need to Know About Kids, Schools & Attention (Part 1) (#263) What Happens When You Take Your Teen's Phone Away: Understanding Screen Addiction & Withdrawal (#262) 11 2011 CIPA Order, 26 FCC Rcd at 11821, para. 5. 33 12 See generally U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services, Office of the Surgeon General, Surgeon General's Warning on the Harms of Screen Use, An Advisory and Toolkit on How to Protect Children and Adolescents (2026), https://www.hhs.gov/sites/default/fi les/us-surgeon-generals-advisory-warning-on- the-harms-of-screen-use.pdf (Surgeon General Screen Advisory). See also infra nn.13, 28-33. This NPRM refers primarily to screen time as it relates to computers, tablets, smartphones, smartboards, and other types of devices connected to the Internet and used at a school or library. We recognize that there are other forms of screen time such as TV, gaming devices, smartwatches, voice activated assistants, and artificial intelligence chatbots that are incorporated into the research and statistics discussed herein but clarify that those forms of screen time are not the focus of this NPRM. 13 American College of Pediatricians, Media Use and Screen Time - Its Impact on Children, Adolescents, and Families (May 2020), https://acpeds.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/09/Media-Use- and-Screen-Time-May-2020.pdf (reporting that children and adolescents' use of media greatly increased in the five to ten years preceding the report); Colleen McClain et al., How Parents Manage Screen Time for Kids (Oct. 8, 2025), docs.fcc.aov/public/attachments/DOC-422168A1.txt Going the other direction, certain internet habits predicted future social isolation. Participants who initially struggled with obsessive video gaming or endless online health searches reported higher levels of isolation at the six-month mark. A person who spends all their free time playing multiplayer games might neglect their real -world friendships, gradually increasing their sense of being alone. Similarly, endlessly searching for health information might increase anxiety about potential illnesses, prompting a person to avoid social events. The statistical models also identified which habits act as the biggest drivers of other psychological problems. Obsessive video gaming and online shopping held the strongest forward -looking influence in the network. A person struggling to control their gaming or shopping was highly likely to develop additional digital 34 obsessions. These specific activities seem to act as gateway behaviors, establishing a pattern of screen-based coping that spills over into other aspects of digital life. Other behaviors appeared to be the end result of underlying psychological distress, including isolation and anxiety. Obsessive use of social media networks and uncontrollable pornography consumption were mostly driven by other preceding factors. The feeling of social isolation itself proved to be highly stable over the duration of the study. If a person felt alone at the start of the study, they were highly likely to report the exact same feeling six months later. Young adults who experience intense loneliness are more likely to develop certain specialized internet habits, such as uncontrollable viewing of online pornography, while obsessive digital gaming or endless health searches online often predict future social isolation. These patterns suggest that treating social disconnection could help prevent various virtual addictions from taking root. The research was recently published in the journal Comprehensive Psychiatry. Which online habits actually predict future social isolation? Digital Madness: How Social Media Is Driving Our Mental Health Crisis --and How to Restore Our Sanity by Nicholas Kardaras (Author) Format: Paperback 4.6 4.6 out of 5 stars (66) See all formats and editions From the author of the provocative and influential Glow Kids, Digital Madness explores how we've become mad for our devices as our devices are driving us mad, as revolutionary research reveals technology's damaging effect on mental illness and suicide rates —and offers a way out. Dr. Nicholas Kardaras is at the forefront of psychologists sounding the alarm about the impact of excessive technology on younger brains. In Glow Kids, he described what screen time does to children, calling it "digital heroin". Now, in Digital Madness, Dr. Kardaras turns his attention to our teens and young adults and looks at the mental health impact of tech addiction and corrosive social media. In Digital Madness, Dr. Kardaras answers the question of why young people's mental health is deteriorating as we become a more technologically advanced society. While enthralled with shiny devices and immersed in Instagram, TikTok, Twitter, Facebook and Snapchat, our young people are struggling with record rates of depression, loneliness, anxiety, overdoses and suicide. What's driving this mental health epidemic? Our immersion in toxic social media has created 35 polarizing extremes of emotion and addictive dependency, while also acting as a toxic "digital social contagion", spreading a variety of psychiatric disorders. The algorithm -fueled polarity of social media also shapes the brain's architecture into inherently pathological and reactive "black and white" thinking —toxic for politics and society, but also symptomatic of several mental disorders. Digital Madness also examines how the profit -driven titans of Big Tech have created our unhealthy tech -dependent lifestyle: sedentary, screen -staring, addicted, depressed, isolated and empty —all in the pursuit of increased engagement, data mining and monetization. But there is a solution. Dr. Kardaras offers a path out of our crisis, using examples from classical philosophy that encourage resilience, critical thinking and the pursuit of sanity -sustaining purpose in people's lives. Digital Madness is a crucial book for parents, educators, therapists, public health professionals, and policymakers who are searching for ways to restore our young people's mental and physical health. Diaital Madness: How Social Media Is Drivina Our Mental Health Crisis -and How to Restore Our Sanitv: Kardaras. Nicholas: 9781250472663: Amazon.com: Books p.18 1 had even been contacted by the U.S. military to do training for the Department of defense (DoD) mental health providers on how to assess and treat video game addiction. Gaming is so severe in the military that There have been several documented and socking cases of military babies dying in the crib from parent neglect as their father played marathon video game sessions. The problem became so significant that the (DoD) mental had to create a new cause of death for the infant death certificates: "Death due to Electric Distraction." Which online habits actually predict future social isolation? Young adults who experience intense loneliness are more likely to develop certain specialized internet habits, such as uncontrollable viewing of online pornography, while obsessive digital gaming or endless health searches online often predict future social isolation. These patterns suggest that treating social disconnection could help prevent various virtual addictions from taking root. The research was recently published in the journal Comprehensive Psychiatry. Which online habits actually predict future social isolation? Mr. President this letter is to illustrate with facts how we embraced social media as educational marvel, when those who developed it such Bill Gates or Steve Jobs new the harm by not have in their home or private schools to be protected the federal 230 rule though it shown to be child abuse when screentime medical recommendations are not being practice by administrator in general as with 36 Esports which is not education sport which has crossing the USA. The publishers of video games such games as Doom and Grand Theft Auto joined President Trump Thursday in a White House roundtable discussion about violent video games and whether they play a part in desensitizing some players and contribute to the likelihood they might commit violence. Schools as in California many are not equipped to prevent brain rot even under age 13 such as E-sports from PRA in Orange Couty CA they don't understand screentime vs time they spend reading books. The state superintendent has limited authority over school districts, which are locally managed. The officeholder instead manages the California Department of Education. This agency guides local school districts and also provides partial oversight. Parents are typically asked to sign paperwork at enrollment granting consent for the schools to give their kids laptops. Nicki Petrossi said when she initially refused to sign it in 2024, the school district in Fullerton, California, told her that she was legally barred from doing so. According to a letter the district provided her, reviewed by NBC News, administrators argued state rules require children to use computers if that's how the school is teaching a curriculum. A spokesperson for the California Department of Education said "how a district implements the state -adopted standards is up to the district." The district did not respond to a request for comment. BLOG POST Mr. President the entrenchment of the education system has prevented to address an international mental health crisis in our country with local government to not responding such as the Orange County Board of Education nor the Board of Supervisor, family five commissions with professional standards across the board. Mr. President, we don't have real oversight to stop the abuse of school's districts screen time, SCR 73 blue light 2019 with an awareness campaign to prevent parents unaware how much a child needs screentime permitted per day. Thank You Craig Durfey 37 DIG,ITAL 1AADNESS How SOCIAL MEDIA Is Driving Our MENTAL HEALTH CRISIS — and How to Restore Our Sanity NICHOLAS KARDARAS7 PH.D. AUTHOR OF GLOW KIDS $28.99 / $38.99 Can. We're on fire, struggling with record rates of depression, loneliness, anxiety, over- doses, mass shootings, and suicide. While COVID-19 exacerbated this crisis, we were at record levels of psychiatric distress before the pandemic. So what's driving our mental health epidemic? In Digital Madness, Dr. Nicholas Karda- ras reveals the toxic impact of our tech obsession and corrosive social media, espe- cially on teenagers and young adults. As we've become mad for our devices, our devices increasingly have been driving us mad. Social media platforms—Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, Instagram, TikTok, as well as Google's search algorithms —are designed to create extremes of emotion, addictive dependency, and depression - inducing sedentary isolation. These plat- forms also shape the way that we think and the way that we process information into binary, black -and -white choices. Such polar- ized thinking is dangerous for politics and our society, and symptomatic of serious mental disorders. We've been manipulated and driven insane by a "New Technocracy" of modern-day robber barons motivated by greed and hubris. But there is a solution. Dr. Kardaras explains how classical philosophy that encourages resilience, critical thinking, and the pursuit of genuine purpose in our lives can restore us to sanity. Digital Mad- ness reveals the toxic and addicting impact of Big Tech, and shows how to break free from it. s u: 28 DIGITAL MADNESS bias and agenda, Google decided to ditch its now meaningless "Don't Be Evil" motto; it was removed completely from Google's corporate code of conduct in 2018.19 Evil was now permissible —of course it was. And one may argue this is indeed the inevitable way of growth and power; as Lord Acton famously said, "Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely." So why wouldn't this apply to the tech industry and the people who created it? After all, we're talking about more wealth and real power than any human being has ever expe- rienced. The question that we need to ask then is how would their perspectives —even their humanity itself —be warped by such power? To be clear, none of this had been my original focus. As a psychologist specializing in mental health and addiction, my entire focus over the past decade had been "screen addiction," not the larger context of the cultural and economic aspects of the problem. Having seen firsthand the increasingly adverse clinical effects of screen time, I'd become alarmed at how quickly these new magical devices were creating serious problems for people —especially younger ones. I started writing about, researching, clinically treating, and gen- erally raising awareness about the impacts of the screen invasion on our society and the attendant "tech addiction" that invariably came with it. My entire focus had been technology addiction, as I went on to develop treatment programs and protocols to address what was becoming a growing global epidemic. I had even been contracted by the U.S. military to do trainings for the Department of Defense (DoD) mental health providers on how to assess and treat video game addiction. Gaming addiction is so severe in the military that there have been several documented and shocking cases of military babies dying in the crib from parental neglect as their fathers played marathon video game sessions. The problem became so significant that the DoD had to create a new cause of death for the infant death certificates: "Death due to Electronic Distraction:'20 I began to realize that, like those neglectful video -game -playing military fathers, we were all, to some degree or another, "electronically distracted" not only from our lives but from the bigger picture as well. Yes, tech addiction —bad. But that VR cow helped me to realize that ADDICTED TO THE MATRIX 29 n't I was pissing in the wind by myopically focusing on too much screen Ite 5 time as the problem, without understanding and addressing the larger societal dynamics that were occurring. I had a nagging and growing sense that the problem was much deeper and direr than simple yet horrible "tech addiction"; habitu- ation to our devices just happened to be a necessary mechanism for a more comprehensive agenda. The problem was indeed much more complex than "Johnny and Suzie like to be on their screens too much." There were major societal shifts happening; there were mental and medical impacts; there were sociopolitical and economic implications. Most importantly, our species was getting weaker and dying. And as I researched this book, I discovered that this wasn't just about greed (although that's always a factor); greed alone is too pe- destrian for the most powerful people who have ever lived. Greed is so yesterday. I'll discuss those other motives more in part 2 of the book. Regardless of whether the motivation is greed or something more, the agenda is clearly more than merely tech addiction. Addiction as control is a necessary ingredient —as it always has been in power dy- namics and oligarchies throughout the ages. Because addiction traps a person; it crushes their free will and makes an individual a slave to their addictive impulses. Rational choice is gone, and what's left is an all -consuming craving or desire for more of whatever the person is addicted to —a craving that doesn't seem rational, as it often has adverse impacts on a person's life: the diabetic with such a severe sugar craving that they'll eat the entire gallon of ice cream, despite the potential for a diabetic coma. Or the smoker with lung cancer and emphysema who just can't give up their Marlboros. The Dopamine Cage On a human level, addiction can seem confounding. Why would an otherwise rational person act so irrationally in the furtherance or pur- suit of their addiction? Yet on a neurophysiological level, addiction is fairly simple to understand, and it starts with the feel -good neu- rotransmitter dopamine and how it affects the brain's reward system. When a person engages in a feel -good dopaminergic behavior From: Christie Campbell Sent: Friday, June 19, 2026 9:04 PM To: Public Comment; Ashleigh Aitken; Carlos A. Leon; Ryan Balius; Natalie Rubalcava; Norma C. Kurtz; Kristen Maahs; Natalie Meeks Cc: Peggy Russell Subject: [EXTERNAL] Please vote NO on the Shea/Festival Center apartments - It's a safety issue You don't often get email from Learn why this is important 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. Dear Council Member, I am writing to you as a resident of Anaheim to ask you to please vote "No" on the proposed apartments at the Anaheim Hills Festival Center. I lived here during the Canyon Fire 2 in 2017, and I will never forget the feeling of being stuck at my house, smoke so thick you couldn't see your hand infront of your face. The car was pack with all our valuables. Our neighbors called and said don't bother getting in your car because we are stuck at the bottom of Bauer Rd. It wasn't just "traffic" —it was a total standstill. You could have walked out faster. The thought of adding hundreds of new apartments and about 1000+ more people to that exact same escape route is terrifying to those of us who have actually been in that situation. The reports for this project say that adding these cars will "only" add about 7 minutes to the evacuation time. But when you're already stuck for three hours and the fire is moving toward you, 7 minutes is a lifetime. We don't have extra roads or "secret" ways out of the Hills; we all end up on the same few lanes. Adding more people to a neighborhood that is already a bottleneck during a fire just feels like a tragedy waiting to happen. I understand that the city needs housing, but it shouldn't be built in a place where people are already struggling to get out safely. Please don't make an existing danger even worse just for a new development. We are asking you to prioritize the lives and safety of the people who already live here and pay taxes here. Sincerely, Christie A Campbell Anaheim, CA 92808 From: Sent: To: Subject: Ruben Soto Friday, June 19, 2026 9:56 PM [EXTERNAL] Watch "#I told you quit messing with me. I'll take yours away" on YouTube 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: Ruben Soto <988ilovegirls@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2026 11:01 AM To: webmaster@riversideca.gov; pxriverside951 @gmail.com; Ruben Soto; Arthur M. Guo; Berenice Ballinas; Cervantes, Clarissa; City Clerk; Lori Smith; Kyliejenner; Nadiarosesotol220; Tax Mail; Ruben Soto; The White House; ratings@martindale.com; Robert; Rep. Lou Correa; recruiting@chp.ca.gov; Rare Beauty; Elizabeth.Roby@ocfl.net; Ralphs; Forever 21; Voiceofoc; Babeerue; Bruns, Melanie; leads@wilshirelawfirm.com; legal@anedot.com; Lisa Speranzo; lola.hahn@mail.house.gov; Public Comment; Apetrousian; Johnny Ogata, Esq.; adam.shaw2@fox.com; joseph.wulfsohn@fox.com; donald.wagner@ocgov.com; OC Women2Women; info@anwarlawoffices.com; info@kroger.com; info@ocwomen2women.org; Inspections_Helpdesk@rivco.org; Olivia Selmanson; U.S. Department of Justice; paysoninn@gmail.com; pughflorencerose@gmail.com; piar@dss.ca.gov; chris.pandolfo@fox.com; Mariana.Perera@mail.house.gov; Mayor; Mhines; management@parishiltonentertainment.com; marystss@guardiansc.com; mayor.scheduling@lacity.org; Media@ocdapa.org; Natnatnathalie@gmail.com; Nostonersallowed 1; clubnews@crunch.com; Granicus Customer Support; communications@macys.com; fbi@subscriptions.fbi.gov; Fox News; Facebook; FidelityNotification@fmr.com; Fraser, Kelsy; Greggo Soto; taisa.theandra@gmail.com; Tigtacommunications; edm.support@tiktok.com;jeff.gennette@gmail.com; steel 18LD3341 @mail.house.gov Subject: [EXTERNAL] Watch "#I put ladies first gentleman. you'll get yours girls believe me" on YouTube 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. https://youtube.com/shorts/NL3il4bvvQGs?is=Tbc0rWGR1 volt ah8 From: Mimi Yattaw Sent: Sunday, June 21, 2026 11:23 AM To: Public Comment Subject: [EXTERNAL] Actionable solutions for Anaheim's community cat overpopulation You don't often get email from Learn why this is important 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. Dear Civic Leader I am reaching out as a long-time Anaheim resident and local animal rescue volunteer to discuss an urgent issue: our city's community cat overpopulation and the needless suffering of thousands of kittens that result from it. The current situation is unsustainable. Local rescues are completely overwhelmed, shelters resort to euthanizing innocent lives due to overcrowding, and residents are left to deal with the heartbreak of stray kittens dying in their neighborhoods everyday. To fix this, we need to shift our focus from reactive rescue to proactive prevention. I want to advocate for the implementation of an aggressive Trap -Neuter -Return (TNR) program in Anaheim. TNR is widely recognized as the most effective and cost-efficient method to stabilize and eventually reduce community cat populations. I am fully prepared to volunteer countless hours, recruit a network of dedicated residents, and lead local fundraising efforts to support this initiative. We have the community will and the manpower, but we need our civic leaders to provide the structural support and policy framework to make it viable. What steps do we need to take to work with the city on establishing an official TNR campaign? I would deeply appreciate the chance to discuss potential solutions and community partnerships with you or a member of your staff. Thankyou foryour time and your service to Anaheim and I look forward to your response. Mimi Yattaw From: Danielle Gorsha Sent: Monday, June 22, 2026 6:56 PM To: Public Comment; Ashleigh Aitken; Carlos A. Leon; Ryan Balius; Natalie Rubalcava; Norma C. Kurtz; Kristen Maahs; Natalie Meeks Subject: [EXTERNAL] Anaheim Hills Traffic Gridlock: Potential Solutions and Concerns Attachments: Friday traffic-Anaheim-Hills.png; Saturday traffic-anaheim-hills.png You don't often get email from Learn why this is important 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. Dear Council and Traffic Department, I'm a 26-year Anaheim Hills resident and small business owner. My team and I drive throughout Anaheim for my rental business, and in fact, we have driven 88,028 miles throughout the city from 2023 to the present. We spend most of our time within six miles of Disneyland, servicing the millions of tourists staying in hotels and Airbnbs, but we drive throughout the city daily from 6 a.m. to midnight. Suffice it to say, I know the streets and traffic patterns of Anaheim. I'm always impressed with the traffic flow throughout the resort area. I also notice that police teams direct traffic during large conventions at the Convention Center as well as events at the Honda Center, Angel Stadium and busy days at the Disneyland parking structures. I rarely experience long traffic delays, even during the busiest times. The same cannot be said for Anaheim Hills. There is gridlock seven days a week on Imperial, Weir Canyon, Serrano, and Nohl Ranch. My freeway exit is Imperial Highway, but Google Maps almost always recommends I exit at either Lakeview or Lincoln/Nohl Ranch. When I do exit at Imperial, I can rarely get over into one of the two left -turn lanes onto Santa Ana Canyon. Trips to Costco, Target and nearby restaurants are not considered between 4 and 7pm. The congestion is no longer limited to Fridays at 5 p.m. The gridlock now occurs every day starting around noon. The freeway intersections are a mess, and road rage is becoming increasingly common. It is no wonder the Council receives so much pushback from residents when evaluating new developments that will add thousands of additional vehicle trips to the area. We all know that congestion on the 91 freeway and the associated cut -through traffic are the major issues. This traffic is not only overcrowding our streets, but it is also creating significant wear and tear on local roads. In addition, very few of these commuters contribute to our local economy by stopping at our stores or restaurants. I asked Al to identify solutions that other cities and countries have used to address similar problems, and the list is below. I would like to know whether any of these strategies are being considered for East Anaheim. From Al I nsight: Anaheim Hills is particularly vulnerable because congestion on the 91 freeway pushes commuters into local neighborhoods, creating exactly the type of "rat -running" or cut -through traffic problem that transportation planners study. The issue is well documented, and many cities have addressed it through targeted neighborhood traffic programs. Below are some of the most relevant solutions used by cities, including several that could realistically apply to Anaheim Hills. 1. Charging Drivers to Enter Certain Areas (Congestion Pricing) Cities install cameras or electronic toll points and charge drivers during peak hours. Examples: • Stockholm and Gothenburg, Sweden, charge vehicles entering the city center during busy hours. • Traffic volumes dropped by approximately 10% during charged periods after implementation. • Singapore, London, and parts of Chile also use electronic tolling systems to reduce congestion. How this could apply to Anaheim Hills: • Charge vehicles entering specific neighborhood zones • Only charge during peak hours (for example, 3-7 p.m.) • Exempt local residents through license plate registration This concept is sometimes called a "Low Traffic Zone" or congestion zone. 2. Restricting Turns During Rush Hour This approach is already used in many U.S. cities. Examples: • No left turns from 3-7 p.m. • No through traffic except for residents • Right -turn -only intersections These restrictions can reduce the ability of commuters to shortcut through neighborhoods. 3. "Local Traffic Only" Streets With Camera Enforcement Some cities use license -plate cameras to create local traffic zones. These systems: • Allow residents, deliveries, and emergency vehicles • Automatically fine vehicles using streets as shortcuts • Reduce through traffic while maintaining neighborhood access 4. Physical Barriers That Prevent Cut -Through Routes Examples include: • Diagonal diverters • Partial street closures • Median barriers • Dead-end conversions Q Cities such as Berkeley, California, have implemented these measures specifically to reduce cut -through traffic. 5. Traffic Calming Measures Examples include: • Speed humps • Mini traffic circles • Narrowed lanes • Raised crosswalks • Curb extensions These measures do not block vehicles but make neighborhood streets less attractive as commuter routes. 6. License -Plate Driving Restrictions Some cities restrict vehicle access based on license plate numbers to reduce traffic and pollution. While more extreme, similar concepts have been used during major events and periods of high congestion. 7. Smart Navigation Blocking Some cities now work directly with Google Maps and Waze to discourage routing through neighborhoods. Strategies include: • Changing street classifications • Adding turn restrictions • Creating traffic patterns that make routing algorithms avoid residential streets Realistic Solutions for Anaheim Hills High -impact ideas: • Rush-hour turn restrictions • Local -traffic -only zones with camera enforcement • Street diverters that break cut -through routes Medium -impact ideas: • Traffic calming measures • One-way street conversions More difficult but potentially effective: • Congestion pricing for entering certain zones • Freeway ramp metering combined with neighborhood restrictions A Strategy That Works Best Many successful cities combine: • Turn restrictions • Physical diverters • Traffic calming measures 3 Together, these strategies make neighborhood routes slower and less convenient than remaining on the freeway. Thank you for your time. I would appreciate understanding whether any of these strategies are being considered and how residents can continue this conversation with the City. Most importantly, residents need confidence that this issue is being actively addressed. Danielle Gorsha -----Original Message ----- From: roark Sent: Saturday, June 20, 2026 9:25 AM To: City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net> Cc: Ashleigh Aitken <AAitken@anaheim.net> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Request for a Ban on Residential Fireworks in Anaheim [You don't often get email from Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderidentification ] 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. Dear Mayor Ashleigh Aitken and Members of the Anaheim City Council, I am writing to respectfully urge the City of Anaheim to enact a complete ban on the use and sale of consumer fireworks within city limits, year-round. Anaheim currently permits "safe and sane" fireworks only around Independence Day. Unfortunately, this policy is difficult to enforce in practice. Fireworks are regularly lit during the days and weeks leading up to and following July 4th, as well as at other times of the year, posing real risks to residents, wildlife, and the environment. I'd also like you to know this isn't an isolated request -- I'm sending this same letter to the Orange County Board of Supervisors and to each of the other nine OC cities that currently permit residential fireworks sales, urging a coordinated, county -wide approach. A single city banning fireworks while its neighbors still allow them simply pushes the problem across the city line; a regionally consistent rule would be far easier for residents and law enforcement to understand and enforce than the current patchwork of differing local ordinances. WHY A FULL, YEAR-ROUND BAN -- NOT A PARTIAL OR SEASONAL ONE The current approach, where only certain "safe and sane" fireworks are allowed during a narrow window, creates confusion that undermines enforcement: Residents often can't easily tell which fireworks are legal "safe and sane" versus illegal, since both are sold and used in the same neighborhoods during the same week. Fireworks are routinely set off for weeks before and after the official window, and on other holidays, using product stockpiled during the legal sales period. Illegal, high-powered fireworks are used alongside legal ones and are difficult to distinguish or cite in the moment, especially at night and from multiple locations -- making the "safe and sane" policy largely unenforceable in practice. SUPPORTING REASONS FOR A FULL BAN 1. Safety risk. Even "safe and sane" fireworks cause serious injuries and fires every year. On July 2, 2025, a fireworks warehouse explosion in California left multiple people missing and ignited a wildfire -- a stark reminder of the risks involved even with legally manufactured and stored product. 2. Public cost. Fireworks season drives a spike in fire, police, and emergency medical calls, all funded by taxpayers -- costs that are largely avoidable. 3. Insurance and risk exposure. Elevated regional fire risk from fireworks use can be reflected in homeowners' insurance costs. 4. Wildfire risk. Fireworks were identified as a contributing factor in the Lachman Fire, which preceded the larger Palisades Fire in Los Angeles -- a cautionary example of how localized fireworks use can cascade into major disaster, especially during dry, windy conditions increasingly common across Southern California. 5. Environmental and wildlife harm. Fireworks are documented to disturb and kill migratory birds, and they leave behind heavy metals, microplastics, and toxic residue that wash into storm drains and waterways. 6. Air quality. Fireworks smoke contributes to elevated PM2.5 and toxic particulate levels for hours and even days afterward, disproportionately affecting children, the elderly, and people with respiratory conditions. 7. Noise and quality of life. Unpredictable, late -night fireworks noise disrupts sleep for weeks at a stretch, with disproportionate impact on veterans with PTSD, infants, and pets -- made worse in summer when residents must keep windows open to cope with heat. LEGAL AND LIABILITY EXPOSURE FOR THE CITY Beyond the public -safety case, continuing to permit residential fireworks sales carries real legal and financial exposure for the City itself, separate from any liability borne by individual residents: Permitting is an affirmative act, not passive inaction. California public entities generally have broad immunity for simply failing to ban or enforce against a hazard (Gov. Code Sections 818.2, 821). But by actively licensing fireworks stands, setting designated sales and discharge windows, and running a lottery for vendor permits, the City is taking affirmative regulatory action -- which is a meaningfully different legal posture than doing nothing. Affirmative permitting schemes are more exposed to "dangerous condition of public property" theories (Gov. Code Section 835) than a city that has simply never addressed the issue. Inverse condemnation is a live and active doctrine in California fire litigation right now. Following the 2025 Los Angeles - area fires, government entities -- notjust utilities -- are being named as defendants under California's inverse condemnation framework, which can hold public entities liable for property damage connected to their actions or infrastructure decisions even without a showing of ordinary negligence. A municipality that knowingly continues a permitting scheme tied to a foreseeable ignition source, after being placed on notice of that risk, is in a different position than one that never licensed the activity in the first place. Litigation and defense costs are real even when the City ultimately prevails. Immunity defenses typically have to be litigated, not assumed -- meaning the City can face significant legal costs, staff time, and reputational exposure responding to claims even in cases it's likely to win on governmental immunity grounds. Insurance and risk -pool costs. Many California cities pool liability and property coverage through joint powers authorities, and insurers and risk pools increasingly price in wildfire -urban -interface exposure when setting premiums for member cities. A documented pattern of fireworks -related fire incidents tied to a City -permitted activity is the kind of claims history that can affect future premium costs for the City itself, notjust residents' homeowner's insurance. Heightened scrutiny after a major incident. If a fireworks -sparked fire causes significant property loss or loss of life in Anaheim -- something that has already happened elsewhere in the County and state -- the City's permitting decisions, enforcement history, and any prior notice of risk (including resident correspondence like this letter) become part of the public record and a focal point for any resulting litigation or state/legislative inquiry. None of this means the City is presently liable for fire damage caused by residents' fireworks -- California's governmental immunity framework is real and substantial. But it does mean that continuing an affirmative, City -run permitting and sales scheme carries a different (and arguably growing) risk profile than transitioning to a fully City -managed, professionally run display model, which removes the City from the permitting chain for residential use altogether. MODELS THAT ALREADY WORK A number of Orange County cities show this can be done without losing the celebration: Cypress hosts a free, professionally managed "Salute to America" fireworks display, with no residential sales or use permitted at all. Irvine bans all personal/residential fireworks citywide, while still offering a large public Independence Day show with fireworks at Great Park -- drawing bigger, safer crowds to a single well -managed event rather than scattering risk across neighborhoods. Mission Viejo bans residential fireworks but hosts a free, city -run July 4th Street Faire and Fireworks Spectacular, complete with shuttle service, that residents can attend without anyone needing to set off their own. Laguna Beach and Newport Beach likewise prohibit all personal fireworks while still supporting public Independence Day events. These cities prove that a full ban doesn't mean the end of Fourth of July fireworks in the community -- it just means moving them from front yards and driveways to a single, professionally run, much safer show that everyone can enjoy together. MY REQUEST That the Anaheim City Council adopt a full, year-round ban on residential fireworks sales and use, redirecting Independence Day celebrations toward a professionally managed, city -sponsored display similar to those in Cypress, Irvine, and Mission Viejo. I'd welcome the opportunity to discuss this further or assist in any way I can. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Roark From: Bobby Olea Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2026 5:52 PM To: Public Comment; Natalie Rubalcava; Ashleigh Aitken; Ryan Balius; Norma C. Kurtz; Kristen Maahs; Carlos A. Leon; Natalie Meeks; dlee@anaheim.net Subject: [EXTERNAL] You don't often get email from Learn why this is important 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. Good evening Mayor and city council. I just found out today Your beloved general manager for Public Utilities is retiring at the end of July if it's true it's a big loss to this city I wish him good luck in his retirement, Mr. Lee From: Stephanie Mercadante Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2026 6:29 PM To: Public Comment Subject: [EXTERNAL] On Behalf of Tom Fielder, District 1, Councilmember Ryan Balius 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. For public comment on June 23, 2026: I want to direct your attention to Anaheim's Annual Water Quality Report emailed to residents on June 19, 2026. Buried on page 10 of the report is a warning specifically for people with compromised immune systems. It states that some people may be more vulnerable to contaminants in drinking water than the general population, including individuals undergoing chemotherapy, organ transplant recipients, people living with HIV/AIDS, older adults, infants, and others with weakened immune systems. My question is simple: how many times has the City publicly discussed this warning to Anaheim's most vulnerable residents? We know residents were exposed to PFAS-contaminated water from Well 51. If the water from that well was not a concern, the well would still be operating today. But it isn't in operation, BECAUSE of the PFAS chemicals. Did the City warn residents when Well 51 distributed PFAS chemicals throughout our drinking water supply for 74 days in the Annual Water Quality Report? No, the City did not. There is no mention of Well 51. Was that intentional? What City employees decided that important information should not be shared with the Anaheim community? Who lied? Who covered it up? You are the governing body of this City. Your responsibility extends far beyond ribbon cuttings, photo opportunities, and ceremonial proclamations. It means asking difficult questions, demanding accountability, and ensuring the health and safety of the residents you were elected to serve. We DEMAND to know: Why hasn't the City Council launched an immediate independent audit investigation into this failure? You have an audit team at the City. You literally have auditors planted at the Lenain Water Treatment every single day. The audacity of this City Council to remain silent rather than find out why Anaheim residents were subjected to PFAS in our drinking water is an all-time low for this Council. For at least 74 days, people drank that water. Families drank that water. Children drank that water. Seniors drank that water. Individuals with cancer and compromised immune systems drank that water. Every unanswered question, every refusal to investigate, and every uncomfortable fact ignored by this Council becomes part of the public record. You may be comfortable with silence. The residents of Anaheim are not. From: Stephanie Mercadante Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2026 6:32 PM To: Public Comment Subject: [EXTERNAL] On Behalf of Marc Herbert 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. For public comment on June 23, 2026: I read a recent article in the LA Times discussing the value of restoring the Anaheim name to the Angels. I find it concerning that City Hall continues to be distracted by nostalgia while residents are demanding accountability. We're talking about a baseball logo and a team name as if that somehow defines Anaheim. It doesn't. Meanwhile, this City has a documented history of disastrous stadium decisions, failed negotiations, insider dealing, and scandals that have embarrassed Anaheim nationally. Yet, instead of demonstrating that lessons have been learned, we're once again hearing discussions about development deals worth hundreds of millions of dollars. The question isn't whether the team should be called the Anaheim Angels. The question is: why should residents trust this City to negotiate another major stadium deal when the same culture that created the last mess appears to still be alive and well? The cover-up culture hasn't disappeared. The selective transparency hasn't disappeared. The refusal to answer difficult questions hasn't disappeared. We continue to see information withheld, concerns dismissed, and accountability delayed until someone forces the issue into public view. Residents don't wake up in the morning worried about where the word "Anaheim" appears on a baseball jersey. They're worried about the safety of their drinking water. They're worried about homelessness. They're worried about crime, public safety, traffic, housing costs, and whether small businesses can survive in this city. They're worried about whether City Hall is being honest with them. Anaheim's reputation will not be restored by putting our name on a baseball team. I would respectfully suggest that this Council stop obsessing over marketing the Anaheim name and start focusing on governing Anaheim, because, so far, you are striking out. From: Stephanie Mercadante Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2026 6:36 PM To: Public Comment Subject: [EXTERNAL] On Behalf of Mike Robbins, District 2, Councilmember Carlos Leon 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. For public comment on June 23, 2026: Lenain Water Treatment Plant, excessive flushing, and accountability. Keith McDonald, the former Water Operations Manager who was transferred on June 9 to manage lab testing, ordered the opening of a valve in September 2025 that had been closed for almost a year. When that valve was opened, it released organic material into the treatment process. When you hear the word "organic," you think of something healthy. Organic fruits. Organic vegetables. Organic food. At a water treatment plant, "organic material" means decomposing vegetation, algae, sediment, decomposing fish, and other dead animals. That is what caused the water to turn brown in September 2025. Did Alert Anaheim employees request that the valve be closed to stop the rot? Yes. Yes, they did. Was the valve closed? No. No, it was not. Keith McDonald continued ordering the valve opened further— all the way to 100%. Keith McDonald, Richard Salas, and Eleanor Busito saw the rotting water firsthand. Those same individuals were involved in providing information for the Water Quality Report. So why was this significant event omitted from the report? Instead of addressing the cause, additional chlorine was added, which did not solve the problem, but it did increase THM levels - disinfectant byproducts you should not breathe or shower in. The State requires testing for THM levels. If THM levels are high, the City has a problem. What happened next? Excessive flushing was ordered by Keith McDonald, Richard Salas, and Eleanor Busito. Hours of flushing before State compliance testing — flushing to manipulate sampling results. When residents began speaking about drinkingwater concerns, rather than taking those concerns seriously, you requested a staff presentation. You thought residents needed to be educated about the water. Does it sound like we need to be educated? We need our elected officials to investigate these allegations. For you, your family, and neighbors. Launch an independent investigation. Follow the facts wherever they lead. Release the findings to the public. Anything less than an independent investigation constitutes a dereliction of this Council's duty to provide oversight and protect the interests of the residents it was elected to serve. From: Stephanie Mercadante Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2026 6:39 PM To: Public Comment Subject: [EXTERNAL] On Behalf of Georgia Price, District 6, Councilmember Natalie Meeks 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. For public comment on June 23, 2026: Integrity starts at the top. Leaders set the standard. Every action you take —or refuse to take —sends a message about what is acceptable, what is rewarded, and what is expected. If you want integrity, you must demonstrate integrity. If you want accountability, you must demand accountability. And if you want employees to do the right thing, you cannot punish them when they do. Because leadership by example is not optional. It is the foundation of every organization's culture. But that can't happen if the City's leaders aren't setting the right example. Employees who raise concerns, ask questions, or challenge questionable decisions are marginalized, ignored, or retaliated against. Meanwhile, those who make bad decisions receive applause, promotions, and pay raises. Let's recap. Former City Manager Jim Vanderpool misled this Council regarding the Havasu trip with former Anaheim Chamber CEO Todd Ament, the central figure in one of the largest corruption scandals in Anaheim's history. When that trip became public, residents deserved answers. With the exception of Mayor Aitken, not one member of this Council was willing to confront it. Your failure to openly address Vanderpool's conduct was deplorable. More importantly, it established a precedent. It reinforced a culture where misconduct is ignored and difficult questions are treated as inconveniences rather than responsibilities. When this Council refused to address unethical behavior by the City's top manager, did you ever stop to think about what type of message that sent to the 3,000 employees who work for this City? You are clearly telling employees that accountability depends on who you are. After all of the scandals this City has endured, after all of the embarrassment and public distrust caused by dishonesty and corruption, your refusal to properly investigate drinking water concerns, DigAlert violations, firework contamination, and other cover-ups that continue to surface at City Hall sends a message that is crystal clear: doing the right thing is not valued at City Hall. So the question is simple: when Anaheim needed leaders, will this Council be remembered for its courage —or for its continued silence? From: Stephanie Mercadante Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2026 6:42 PM To: Public Comment Subject: [EXTERNAL] On Behalf of Jeanine Robbins, District 2, Councilmember Carlos Leon 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. For public comment on June 23, 2026: Every month, the City posts professional services agreements and other contracts that fall under the City Manager's authority. And why do you post these contracts? Let me enlighten you as to the reasoning: Because after the Harry Sidhu corruption scandal and the Angel Stadium debacle, residents demanded greater transparency and accountability over how City Hall spends taxpayer money. So now the City posts the contracts, labels it "transparency," and congratulates itself for posting the contracts online. Who is evaluating whether those contracts delivered value to taxpayers? Who is making sure these contracts were not awarded to family members or friends or even campaign donors? Who is measuring performance? Who is reviewing whether the work was completed as promised? Who is asking whether the scope was justified, the spending was reasonable, and the deliverables were actually delivered? Is the City just having Debbie Moreno blindly pay invoices? Is this type of laissez-faire approach to contracts the City's idea of good governance? Which brings us back to the Lenain Water Treatment Plant. The City Council approved Brown and Caldwell to audit the plant operations. These auditors are there every single day. It is our understanding that these "auditors" are receiving operational training, shadowing staff, and also sleeping in their cars. What exactly are taxpayers paying for? How do you audit a water treatment plant and not focus on laboratory data, treatment performance, operational decisions, and compliance practices? How do you ignore the information being provided to the public that clearly contradicts what is happening at the plant? If these auditors are auditing water operations, how did they miss one of the biggest issues raised by residents: The extensive flushing that occurred before compliance sampling? These seem like pretty basic things to audit. And yet they were ignored. And are still being ignored. This City never hesitates to spend money. But when it comes time to ask whether the money was well spent, suddenly nobody seems interested. Responsible government isn't knowing how much money was spent. Responsible government is knowing why it was spent, whether the justification was sound, whether the deliverables were received, and whether Anaheim taxpayers got a return on their investment. If you're not asking those questions, then you're not providing oversight —you're simply providing a rubber stamp. It is time to change the way you are doing business. From: Stephanie Mercadante Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2026 6:45 PM To: Public Comment Subject: [EXTERNAL] On Behalf of Stephanie Mercadante, District 4, Councilmember Norma Campos Kurtz 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. For public comment on June 23, 2026: Let's stop pretending that family and other close relationships between Council Members and City employees don't create pressure. Because they do. No matter what anyone says publicly, every employee in this organization understands the reality. If a family member of a Council Member becomes the subject of discipline, scrutiny, or an investigation, there is pressure. Pressure on supervisors. Pressure on department heads. Pressure on the City Manager's Office. Pressure to look the other way. And everyone knows it. The issue isn't whether a Council Member has direct authority over City employees. We all know they don't. The issue is influence. The issue is whether people making personnel decisions believe there could be consequences for holding certain individuals accountable. Because once that perception exists, the damage is already done. Employees begin to wonder whether everyone is being held to the same standard. They begin to wonder whether accountability depends on performance or proximity to power. And they begin to wonder whether some people are simply untouchable. Influence doesn't always come in the form of a direct order. Sometimes it's a phone call. Sometimes it's a conversation. Sometimes it's simply the understanding that making a certain decision will create problems for you later. That's how pressure works. And City leadership knows it. They have experienced it. They understand exactly what I'm talking about. If this Council truly wants a culture of integrity and accountability, then it must acknowledge the obvious: relationships matter, influence matters, and public confidence is damaged whenever employees believe different rules apply to different people. The moment employees believe some people are protected because of who they know or who they're related to, the City's credibility is gone. And once credibility is gone, no amount of public relations or carefully crafted statements will bring it back. From: Stephanie Mercadante Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2026 6.48 PM To: Public Comment Subject: [EXTERNAL] On Behalf of Dave Duran, District 1, Councilmember Ryan Balius 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. For public comment on June 23, 2026: Last year, under this mayor and City Council, Anaheim faced a budget deficit of approximately $60 million. This year, we're facing another deficit of roughly $40 million. That's nearly $100 million in budget shortfalls over just two years. Yet somehow, Debbie Moreno —the person responsible for overseeing the City's finances —received a raise. Not during a period of fiscal stability, and not after eliminating a structural deficit. But, instead, while Anaheim was facing its second consecutive year of massive budget shortfalls. And this wasn't announced to the public with any fanfare, discussion, or openly debated. It was maliciously buried in personnel documents presented by Human Resources Director Linda Andal and approved by this Council on April 21, making it difficult for the public to see and easier for the public to miss unless they happened to dig through the supporting materials themselves. In 2012, the position Debbie Moreno now holds was approved at an annual salary of approximately $182,000. Today, the maximum compensation for that same position exceeds $314,000—a 73% increase. Linda and Debbie are claiming this raise is due to her performing both Finance Director and Treasurer roles- but here's the truth - she was already given a 10% raise for that years ago. Another example of how the mayor and council have failed to be good fiduciaries of public funds. How does this increase make any sense? Last year, the City balanced its budget by relying on one-time funding sources. This year, we're once again facing a major budget gap. The question isn't whether the budget can be balanced on paper. The question is whether Anaheim has a long-term financial strategy or whether we're continuing to rely on temporary fixes while operating with a structural deficit. So what exactly is the City rewarding? And while we're discussing financial responsibility and oversight, let's talk about the City's purchasing - card program. According to public reporting, Anaheim employees charged approximately $17 million on City purchasing cards between 2023 and 2025. Former City Manager Jim Vanderpool and Public Information Officer Mike Lyster publicly stated that credit-card audits had already been conducted. The city website states that Mayor Aitken led a series of transparency reforms at City Hall in 2023. Yet residents still have not been informed about the results of those audits or whether any meaningful oversight has occurred. If transparency reform is actually true... Where are the audits? Why haven't they been presented to this Council? Why haven't they been released to the public? Residents deserve answers. At some point, this mayor and council need to ask a simple question: What performance metrics justify these raises? Because if taxpayers are expected to live within their means, City Hall should be expected to do the same. Maybe the problem isn't the budget. Perhaps the problem is the remarkably low standard by which this mayor and council measure performance and accountability.