The parallels between Fullerton and Santa Ana are eerie. We all know that Fullerton is where Santa Ana Mayor Miguel Pulido grew up. And he still serves on the board of a bank in Fullerton. More than one Santa Ana City employee has run for the Fullerton City Council – and now a professor who teaches at Fullerton Junior College is running for the SAUSD School Board. The same School Board where Sal Tinajero was once a Trustee. Tinajero beat the odds and was elected to the Santa Ana City Council – and he teaches at a high school in Fullerton.
The latest connection involves “SoCo Walk, a mixed-use project in downtown Fullerton that opened in late 2006,” according to the L.A. Times.
SoCo Walk “is next to the busy Santa Fe Depot that serves Amtrak and Metrolink trains — are touted as ways to put housing, shopping and work close together.”
But there is a problem. In fact quite a few problems, “Neighbors of the project say its residents don’t mix with the existing community. And though some SoCo Walk residents say their lives improved when they dropped the commute, many worry they’re too close to downtown and all its attendant problems. The harshest critics say the project was badly executed.”
This all reminds me of Santa Ana’s Santiago Lofts, which like the SoCo Walk attracted an interesting mix of new residents, but it also stuck them in an area where they are under-served by the existing business base, and where crime is a very real issue.
In fact SoCo Walk residents are also complaining about gangs and drug-dealing.
Tonight the Fullerton City Council debated yet another of these mixed-use developments. I don’t know the outcome of that debate yet but I am sure it was quite a stormy process.
Personally I think these developments show some promise but you can’t just dump them into troubled areas and expect them to solve everything. In both Fullerton and Santa Ana there is a need to invest in troubled areas and to provide more educational and recreational opportunities to the youth, particularly those whose families are hovering on the poverty line.
In related news, Santa Ana Planner Karen Haluza is running for the Fullerton City Council this year. I was a bit harsh in my initial assessment of Haluza, based on my experience with her when I served on the Santa Ana Housing and Redevelopment Commission. She seemed to be quite the cold fish at the time.
However I ran into Haluza at the Memphis last week and she was quite charming. In fact I am told that Fullerton Republicans are getting behind her, even though she is a Democrat. Apparently there is some unrest in Fullerton with some of the Republicans on the City Council, notably Dick Jones. He is widely viewed as an ineffective stooge for Congressman Ed Royce.
Haluza has also attracted the ire of Red County Editor Matt “Jubal” Cunningham. That actually will probably help her more than anything else. If she does win, she will have her hands full dealing with Fullerton’s planning issues – which sure look a lot like Santa Ana’s planning issues…
Karen Haluza is the consummate bureaucrat. She serves her government bosses well.
It will be interesting to follow this to see if she is capable of developing her own base of values, her own philosophy of governance. Or will she fall into the bureaucratic washing machine spin cycle?
Geez Art, who ever said that these developments would “solve everything”? Redevelopment and revitalization is a PROCESS that takes many, many years. Cities can do this AND invest in troubled areas…when the real estate market isn’t in the crapper, that is.
Art,
As a Planning Commissioner I work quite extensively with Karen and she is great. She has been of tremendous assistance to me since joining the commission and I have come to really appreciate her work.
I think that she would make a great councilperson and I hope the voters in Fullerton agree. She is a planning professional who bases her decisions on careful, well thought analysis rather than poltical expediency.
Sean,
She bases her decisions on careful well thought bureaucratic suck up language according to the wishes of her city management and political bosses. She has not exhibited ANY core values of her own.
#2
It is possible redevelopment and revitalization takes time. Many of us in Santa Ana are still waiting for the Willard redevelopment/ revitalization project to fulfill its promise.
Anon,
Clearly you have decided to bash Karen and clearly you don’t really know her at all. Karen’s job is to follow the wishes of her superiors, i.e. the city manager. We all have to answer to someone, right?
With that being said, Karen isn’t someone who simply takes orders. She adds he input and pushes for what she think is best even though she knows it isn’t what folks on the 8th floor want to hear. But at the end of the day she can only implement what she is allowed to. If the projects are less than sufficient, that’s an 8th floor problem not a Karen problem.
You see Karen and Jay Trevino aren’t like the others that have been in their positions previously. They are both educated planning professionals that have extensive real world planning experience. When they came to Santa Ana they both brought a lot to the table.
In the past under Dave Ream the folks in their positions were only there because they had demonstrated loyalty to Dave and were willing to do as the were told without question. They were simply order takers without much to offer.
The residents of Santa Ana are lucky to have folks like Jay and Karen and Fullerton residents will be lucky to have Karen on the city council there.
Sean says: “In the past under Dave Ream the folks in their positions were only there because they had demonstrated loyalty to Dave and were willing to do as the were told without question. They were simply order takers without much to offer.”
anon says: Still true of the current batch of bureaucrats including Karen Haluza.
What does she stand for Sean? Open and genuine participatory government? I seriously doubt that.
Anon,
Yes she does believe in open dialog in which the public acts as an active participant. In all my dealings with her she has been open, forthcoming and encouraging of debate on projects.
In my opinion, I believe that she feels that the more vetting a project gets the better the project you will get.
Please cite an example of her trying to stifle participation. Please be as specific as possible.
Sean,
We could start with her department not giving a “heads-up” to the neighborhood near Buffalo Wild Wings that if the residents wanted to have the City Council discuss the ABC (liquor license) C.U.P. application which was approved by the SA Planning Commission the residents would need to request that a member of the City Council pull that item from the Consent Agenda at the next City Council meeting.
That would have been open and honest participatory government. Residents are not full time paid City bureaucrats, they do not know those rules. It would be up to open and honest people to bring that tid-bit of information to the people who would be effected by a loud, noisy and neighborhood disrupting sports bar – that they may discuss the matter with their City Council.
Is that specific enough for you Sean?
Anon,
That process was completely open and transparent. A small number of residents had their say and in the end the commission unanimously supported the development. To say that it was anything other than that is simply disingenuous.
Buffalo Wild Wings is a nationally respected chain of “family” restaurants. It is a far car from “a loud, noisy and neighborhood disrupting sports bar”.
So again I don’t believe you can prodeuce any evidence of Karen being opposed to open government and public participation.
Sean says: “That process was completely open and transparent.”
That is Santa Ana bureaucracy code for – give the bare minimum of legally required information.
Hardly evidence of open participatory government.
Hmmm Andy Dick loves BBW!
A real family establishment! Its not just Andy that acts like a dick! Follow either of these links!
http://link.brightcove.com/services/link/bcpid353549946/bctid1672070882
http://www.tmz.com/2008/07/17/dick-teased-before-gettin-popped/
OOpppsss its BWW! Still check it out!
“Hardly evidence of open participatory government.”
Was anybody denied their right to participate in the hearing? Was it not held in an open forum?
Trying to say that this was anything but an exercise in free and open government is ludicrous and patently false.
Just because you did not get the results you desired from the commission does not make it a sham of a process. Everyone was allowed to speak and give their opinions. Nobody was prevented from participating.
Trying to now make it seem as if something underhanded went on is quite unethical. The residents of Santa Ana had an opportunity to be heard. Stop lying and painting a false picture of what happened.
These tactics are disingenuous and did a tremendous disservice to the community at large. When folks like you continue to mislead the community and make them believe that their government is made up of folks that are somehow underhanded you taint the entire community. Shame on you!
Yeah Ok,
The was recently a shooting in a church:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,391786,00.html
Should the Planning Commission move to rid the city of all churches because of this once incident?
Using Andy Dick’s behavior as a reason to keep BWW’s out of Santa Ana is quite a stretch. But then again, so was trying to equate it to a strip bar.
Sean….Why so serious?
I never said I thought that a BWW should not be in the city of Santa Ana you dolt.
Never had a problem with BWW being in the city myself.
Just pointing out that I find it humorous that this is a so called family establishment. Which in many of its commercials you can find on YOU TUBE calls itself a “BAR”.
Way to go though comparing a church to a BWW! You take yourself way to seriously Sean. More serious I think than most take you but thats ok 😉 its all jokes Sean all jokes.
Sean,
Sounds like I struck a nerve.
I said that the City gave the bare minimum of legally required information. They could have done more, but that is not how the bureaucracy of Santa Ana works.
Were you aware that the residents who were opposing BWW could have talked to a councilperson before the next council meeting in order for those residents to have discussion of the BWW ABC C.U.P. at the council meeting?
Are you aware of any effort made by City staff or the Planning Commission to alert those residents that they could request this of a councilmember?
It is very rude and bullying of you to call someone a liar and call shame on them for stating exactly the circumstances and their opinion.
Exactly where have I lied Sean or misstated any facts?
“Exactly where have I lied Sean or misstated any facts?”
When you imply that the whole process was not open and transparent.
You can always speak to a councilperson about any issue and ask them to bring it up for a disscussion. In fact you can address the item by simply filling out a speakers card at the council meeting.
Just because something is on the consent calendar does not mean that you are precluded from discussing it publicly.
“These tactics are disingenuous and did a tremendous disservice to the community at large. When folks like you continue to mislead the community and make them believe that their government is made up of folks that are somehow underhanded you taint the entire community. Shame on you!”
Whoa, for a second there I thought you were talking about Art.
anon: “Exactly where have I lied Sean or misstated any facts?”
Sean: When you imply that the whole process was not open and transparent.
That is not a lie – that is my opinion. I am entitled to my opinion without your unprofessional, rude and intimidating remarks.
Also, you did not give a direct response to my questions concerning BWW. City bureaucrats – and you – know the rules, residents don’t.
You did not inform residents that the BWW ABC C.U.P could have been brought up at the City Council meeting.
You and Karen Haluza tied the BWW matter up with a pretty bow and presented it to the Council.
The Council prefers to not have messy little public discussions of items brought before them if they can help it. You served the Council well Sean.
However, you left the residents hanging out to dry.
“The Council prefers to not have messy little public discussions of items brought before them if they can help it.”
Ya gotta admit it Sean, this is GENERALLY true. And it’s also true that the city does the BARE MINIMUM to inform residents of important developments and plans. I remember MANY folks showing up for the RSP design charrettes and complaining that they had heard about it through word of mouth at the last minute.
If this city were truly interested in an open government it would establish an e-mail system that allows residents to sign up for notifications of hearings etc.
A campaign to alert the residents of this service could be implemented by notification in the water bill, advertising on the city’s TV channel and school TV station.
Bottom line: the city prefers uninformed residents. It’s easier to handle an uninformed resident than an informed resident. The city/Clowncil has a practice of making the informed resident the bad person. And this is accomplished by Pulido’s private of army of puppets who make it their duty to dirty up the reputations of these fine folks.
“you left the residents hanging out to dry”
Anon,
Regarding BWW I believe that the decision reached by myself and EVERY OTHER MEMBER of the Planning Commission was in the best interests of the residents of Santa Ana.
BWW is a credible establishment that will bring tax revenue into the city and will provide residents with a quality establishment in which they can take their families.
This attempt by a tiny minority of residents to paint it as something horrific is quite disingenuous. I believe that the Planning Commission and the city staff served the residents quite well in regards to the development.
In the mixed use question.
How did an “sports arena “ zoning overlay for all of the “Industrial zoned” areas of Santa Ana get by without going though the various city committees and boards.
From the tiny discussion, I can’t think of how night time indoor soccer games can be held inside ongoing factory type business’s.
If a council member doesn’t understand an item, can they pass on a vote?
Cook.
Let me answer your bottom line which reads
“If a council member doesn’t understand an item, can they pass on a vote?”
One would expect that every member of the council comes to the council meeting having read all the back up materials and with an open mind to public debate on every item.
There are times when elected or appointed officials must recuse themselves from the dais to avoid a conflict of interest.
We recently had a council member decide not to vote on a matter where he “abstained.” You would expect that every member of that board vote up or down on every issue where they don’t have a conflict.
In this case, and in my perception, was that he was playing it safe so that his vote would not be used against him in a future election.
“Regarding BWW I believe that the decision reached by myself and EVERY OTHER MEMBER of the Planning Commission was in the best interests of the residents of Santa Ana.”
So what you deem is the in their best interest is what is actually in their best interest? I’m confused these peoples opinions of whats in their best interest never mattered to you or the other members just what you think is best for them. I’m so glad you’ve cleared that up!
And yes this is still coming from someone that never cared whether or not there was a BWW in SA. I care whether the residents in SA get any respect which I’m seeing is clearly not that case.
My dukes are up Sean…but my spirits are sagging…so much corruption in SA.
Sean,
The residents deserved to be heard concerning the BWW ABC (liquor) C.U.P before the City Council made the affirmation of the Planning Commission ruling.
Perhaps the Council could have provided additional conditions on the alcohol C.U.P. which would have mitigated the harm this sports bar is going to bring to the neighborhood.
Possible conditions such as closing at 11:00 pm on weeknights, installing controlled gates to minimize parking in the rear of the building, signs in the parking lot to direct traffic towards the shopping center exit which is controlled by a traffic light – and more.
There was a lot the Council could have done to minimize the negative effects Buffalo Wild Wings sports bar will have on the Parkwood, Meredith and Portola Neighborhoods.
Neither the Planning Commission nor City staff (including Karen Haluza) brought this discussion possibility to the attention of the residents. That is what I mean when I say that you hung the residents out to dry.
“The residents deserved to be heard concerning the BWW ABC (liquor) C.U.P before the City Council made the affirmation of the Planning Commission ruling.”
Was anyone prevented from being heard on this issue? NO!
Folks had every opportunity to be heard. The bottom line is that you did not like the outcome. These claims of ignorance of the procedures is just the latest attempt to try and discredit the Planning Commission and staff.
Wasn’t one of those joining you in opposition a former member of Santa Ana’s planning staff? Are you telling me that he was not aware of the procedures?
This just sounds like another excuse to take cheap shots at the commission and the staff.
Cheap shots aren’t even being doled out yet from what I can read. But the truth hurts don’t it (at least in opinion form)!
Lets face it the best interest of the residents of SA are rarely taken into consideration…its commonly the big bucks (tax dollars) that get most of the consideration. Been to the a few of the Planning Commission meetings myself where one Mr. Leo sat sideways not even look at me while I spoke to ALL the members of the planning commission guess he must have been looking around for my best interest somewhere huh.
“But the truth hurts don’t it”
The truth is that these folks had every opportunity to be heard and they simply did not like the outcome. To say that they were somehow prevented from voicing their concerns is simply misleading and untrue.
This new plan of attack in which they have chosen to blame their ignorance of the procedures on the commission and staff is also quite disingenuous.
One of the folks opposing the BWW is a former member of the city of Santa Ana planning staff. I am quite sure that he is well versed in the procedures. This is just the latest “talking point” being used by certain folks that want to lay blame at the feet of the commission and staff.
BWW is going to be an excellent edition to our community. Despite the NIMBY concerns of a small group of folks, the majority of city residents will be happy to have such an establishment in the city.
All these claims and accusations, that some want to label as “opinions”, are nothing more than anger over the outcome. The folks oppose any development at the “commercial” center, but rather than say that they have chosen to muddy the waters with conjecture.
Sean
There seems to be a blatant lack of respect being shown by yourself as a member of the planning commission and in their name. Opinion is opinion, being in a position of power does not make it ok to treat people so shabbily.
You are on a the Planning Commission for the City of Santa Ana, you should show ALL of the residents respect regardless of the job they think you are doing or them not respecting you and the Commissions power. It is their right to be upset and question and have opinions or agree with you if they so choose.
Seems like as a member of the commission you should maybe just stay out of these discussions instead of being like well I win you lose so now you are mad. What does that say about your commission and what you think about the residents of this your city. In the future you may find these things to be a conflict of interest. Its just disturbing to even read what is written above. Rip me a new one I’m sure you will but I am saying this because I see what I see. Am I saying I’m right of course not, I am just stating my opinion as a voting resident in Santa Ana.
Respect,
I am not showing a lack of respect towards any residents. In fact, myself and my fellow commissioners showed nothing but respect for all parties involved.
I am not saying that “I” won and “you” lost. I believe that the residents of Santa Ana won with the outcome of this decision.
I am not condemning anyones opinion and I welcome to hear their positions on this and every development coming before me.
However when they say that we did not offer them the opportunity to have their voices heard and that the commission and staff stifled public participation, I am going to call them on that.
This muddying of the waters and spreading of mistruths shows a lack of respect for the staff and the commission and most importantly it shows a lack of respect for the process.
In my position as a commissioner I always respect those that come before me and strive to make sure that their voices are heard. I would hope that respect was a two-way street.
I do not care what you showed anyone at a meeting or meetings, I care how you talk to and reply to residents in this forum. I know the meetings I have witnessed first hand people being talked down to, commisioners rolling their eyes and speaking to one another, showing complete disrespect while residents or others are having their 3 minutes but my comments were not in regard to those meething because that is a lost cause arguement and not worth my time.
This is about the respect you show here. I’m done I should have stay a reader and not posted because you are one of those last word people. I hope you enjoy waiting for your last word with the people here cause I doubt you are gonna win that one.
Guess my comment was lost on you.
As far as I am concerned these people must be on to something when it comes to the Planning Commision or you wouldn’t spend so much time defending it.
Respect,
I don’t think you really care about anything other than defending those that have misrepresented the facts surrounding the BWW hearing and trying to paint myself, my fellow commissioners and the city staff as the bad guys.
I have not been disrespectful to anyone in the course of this discussion or during any of the public testimony regarding BWW.
As far as people being “on to something” give me a break. I find it quite disrespectful for folks to insinuate that my fellow commissioners or I did not support an open democratic process. I will never shy away from defending our integrity when it is called into question and you can take that to the bank. On that I will have the final word.
Sean says: “I am not showing a lack of respect towards any residents.”
Sean called me a liar in post no. 14. I am a resident of SA. I think that qualifies as a lack of respect.
Waiting for an apology Sean.
junior
Junior,
I too am a resident of Santa Ana. I believe that your constant attempt to mislead my fellow residents as to the actions by city staff, city commissions or specific commissioners is not only disrespectful but dishonest.
I have been quite tolerant of your continued misrepresentation of the facts. However your failure to cease in accusing city staff, the Planning Commission or myself of trying to undermine the democratic process or continuing to accuse anyone of silencing the publics right to be heard leaves me to believe that you have chosen to perpetuate lies rather than have a civil debate on the issues.
I have no reason to apologize. I have remained honest and civil and tried to have a rational discussion regarding this. It is clear to me that your agenda prevents you from doing this.
Your continued attacks on myself, Karen Haluza or anyone else involved in this issue speaks volumes to your character. The fact that you are a resident of this city does not give you the right to defame me or anyone else.
Keep waiting Junior.
“Stop lying …”
“I don’t think you really care about anything other than defending those that have misrepresented the facts surrounding the BWW hearing …”
“This muddying of the waters and spreading of mistruths …”
Sean – Where are the lies, misrepresentation of facts and the spreading of mistruths in any of my or others comments?
Point out the exact lies, mistruths and misrepresentations – not vague statements. If you are calling me a liar the least you can do is back this up with facts.
junior
Sean,
I am simply saying that you and your fellow PC members and City staff (including Karen Haluza) had the opportunity to inform residents that they could ask a councilmember to take the BWW ABC (liquor) C.U.P. from the consent agenda.
You did not take the opportunity to inform residents that this item could have been so discussed, and possibly mitigated for the benefit of the affected residents, at the Council level.
Is that an accurate statement?
Junior
Why didn’t the people in the area buy this land and delicate it to parkland during the decades it sat empty?
Isn’t this private property?
Sean –
The perception that the city does not adequately communicate w/the residents is a fair statement.
If the city council were truly interested in what the residents think of their elected officials and city admins, then they would take Anaheim’s lead and retain JD Powers to conduct an independent study on how the residents view the city, its services, and elected officials.
C’mon Sean, be an advocate for the residents of the city and urge your pal Tinajero to lead the charge on this worthwhile project.