4. Appendix to Minutes (03/24/26) — Anaheim City Council, June 9, 2026 (part 1 of 3)

ou don' t often get email from alex9355b@outlook. com. Learn why this is important Date: 3/22/2026 12: 33: 12 PM
From:" Alex Brown" Alex9355b@outlook. com
To:" Public Comment" publiccomment@anaheim. net
Subject:[ EXTERNAL] city council - Agenda Item #17 on March 24 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.

The press and OC residents have been documenting the shelter’ s problems for the last 3 years. The city has done nothing to push the shelter to clean house. Once you renew the contract, these are now YOUR problems.

Information from the press with links found on https:// OCShelter. com Fullerton Observer, March 18, 2026
Issues at OC Animal Care and Other Shelters
https://fullertonobserver.com/2026/03/18/issues-at-oc-animal-care-and-other-shelters/ Recent articles and community opinions shed light on troubling issues at Orange County Animal Care ( OC Animal Care) and other municipal animal shelters across California, highlighting concerns around data integrity, negligence, and the overall treatment of animals.

Voice of OC, March 17, 2026
The Co unty Animal Shelter has a Data Integrity Problem https:// voiceofoc. org/ 2026/ 03/ mavrovouniotis- the- county- animal- shelter- has- a- data- integrity- problem/ Numbers don’t add up at OC Animal Care, and it’s not the first time. In shelter statistics, animals inexplicably vanish between reports. The billing calculations are based on faulty data as well.

Why do the county and OC cities allow this?
Voice of OC, March 11, 2026
Advocates Demand Refo rm at California Animal Shelters, Including Orange County https://voiceofoc.org/2026/03/california-animal-shelters-reform/ Animal advocates sent cease and desist letters to municipal animal shelters across the Golden State, including OC Animal Care in Orange County.

Excerpts:

One of the major concerns mentioned in the cease and desist letters is the concept of “ reduced/managed intake” that minimizes the overall number of animals coming into the shelter in an attempt to reduce euthanasia.

Managed intake often involves shelters turning away animals or encouraging members of the public to keep the animal themselves, put it back where it was found or contact a rescue organization.

OC Animal Care, the county-run animal shelter in Orange County, received a cease and desist letter dated Feb. 13.

The county shelter — which has been the subject of numerous grand jury investigations and resident protests over the past several years — practices managed intake for stray cats.

Read: Grand Jury: OC Animal Shelter Needs Updated Policies to Stop Killing More Animals] The shelter does not accept healthy stray cats. Instead, it only accepts sick, injured or underage cats.

Virga said this could be a violation of the Hayden Act, a 1998 state law that outlines certain requirements for animal shelters like mandatory veterinary care and holding periods for stray animals.

To read the cease and desist letter sent to OC Animal Care, click here.

Orange County Supervisors also weighed in on the shelter’ s conditions during their Feb. 24 meeting.

Supervisor Janet Nguyen said the shelter has made improvements over the past year, but it’s a work in progress.

Please know that we appreciate you, but there is still some work to be done,” she said at that meeting.

Nguyen said animal shelter staff are working on a report regarding the 2018 strategic plan and asked for an update within the next 30 days.

Supervisor Vicente Sarmiento thanked residents for pushing for improvements at the shelter and said staff should issue regular updates to make sure OC Animal Care is meeting goals laid out in the strategic plan.

I think we need to do something on a periodic basis, almost as a dashboard, and make sure we’re able to see how we’re doing on these different concerns that we have that are outlined in the strategic plan,” he said.

Shelters should be learning from their mistakes and moving forward and adopting the more enlightened approaches that some of the other shelters in other areas are adopting,” Dales said.

We’ re not seeing that in California on the whole.”
Fullerton Observer, March 5, 2026
Co mpanio n Animal Pro tectio n So ciety Releases Sho rt Do cumentary Entitled A CAPS Investigatio n o f OC Animal Care https://fullertonobserver.com/2026/03/05/companion-animal-protection-society-releases-short-documentary-entitled-a-caps-investigation-of-oc-animal-care/ Shelter mismanagement and failure by the county to conform to a strategic plan and audits have resulted in animal suffering.

You can view the 15- minute video here: A CAPS Investigation of OC Animal Care Voice of OC, February 2, 2026
Lamirande: Ho w Negligent are OC Cities in Their Co ntract with the County Animal Shelter? https://voiceofoc.org/2026/02/lamirande-how-negligent-are-oc-cities-in-their-contract-with-the-county-animal-shelter/ Dear city officials, if you hire people with a track record of dishonesty and incompetence, you’re responsible for the consequences. If you are in favor of good governance and a good shelter you must make two demands: First, get rid of toxic managers. Second, transparently implement the Strategic Plan.

Research study, February 2026
How long do do gs stay in a shelter? We can measure this accurately and link it to shelter o peratio ns https:// link. growkudos. com/ 1eob559gykg
Voice of OC, January 4, 2026
OC Animal Care Faces Negligence Lawsuit After Dog Mauling https://voiceofoc.org/2026/01/oc-animal-care-faces-negligence-lawsuit-after-dog-mauling/ Aformer volunteer is suing the county animal shelter after she was attacked by a shelter dog, bitten 18 times while screaming for help.

Voice of OC, December 4, 2025
Is the County Working to Fix the Animal Shelter’s Problems? If so , Why Haven’t Any Progress Reports Been Released? https:// voiceofoc. org/ 2025/ 12/ vaughn- is- the- county- working- to- fix-the- animal- shelters- problems- if-so- why- havent- any- progress- reports- been- released/ While there’ s some positive change in the shelter, serious problems remain. OC needs to be transparent about the implementation ( or not?) of the shelter’ s taxpayer- funded Strategic P lan. It also needs to value its experienced volunteers, instead of restricting them to crowded walkways and yards deteriorating into mud pits.

OC Register, August 17, 2025
Owner o f Woo fy Acres dog rescue charged with 16 co unts o f animal cruelty https://www.ocregister.com/2025/08/15/owner-of-woofy-acres-dog-rescue-charged-with-multiple-counts-of-animal-cruelty/ Excerpts:

The owner of a Southern California dog rescue has been charged with 37 criminal counts of mistreating the animals, nearly 100 of which were in such bad condition they had to be euthanized.

Woofy Acres first made headlines in early 2024 after Bedford was accused of abandoning 32 dogs — many from Orange County — at a Rowland Heights kennel in Los Angeles County.

Woofy Acres was heavily used by Orange County Animal Care.

Orange County Animal Care has released a total of 149 dogs to Woofy Acres, with the last placement in January 2024. It is unclear whether any dogs from Orange County were among the dogs sei zed by authori ti es.

Voice of OC, August 7, 2025
Two Do gs Dead in Transport from OC Animal Care to Idaho https://voiceofoc.org/2025/08/two-dogs-dead-in-transport-from-oc-animal-care-to-idaho/ Excerpt:

U.S. Department of Transportation statistics show shortnosed breeds of dogs are more likely to die during air transport than dogs with normal-length muzzles, and similar risks are likely during road transportation,” reads a best practices resource document from the AVMA for relocating pets in non-emergency situations.

This is thought to be related to respi ratory problems that are exacerbated by stress and di ffi culty with thermoregulation, so caution should be exerci sed when transporting these animals during warm weather,” it conti nues.

When transporting animals on the road, the American Veterinary Medical Association recommends keeping the trips as short as possible.

Research Study, March 2025
Yo u’ re more likely to adopt a dog yo u see face to face: Animal shelter visitation po licies matter https:// link. growkudos. com/ 1ewal0slvr4
Voice of OC, February 18, 2025
OC Cities are Badly Served by the Co unty Animal Shelter. Is Reform Possible? https://voiceofoc.org/2025/02/lamirande-oc-cities-are-badly-served-by-the-county-animal-shelter-is-reform-possible/ Residents paid OC Animal Care $5.8 million in license fees. On top of that, OC cities paid $15.7 million out of their budgets. The county bureaucracy collected $8.4 million in admin costs.

Supervisors Nguyen and Sarmiento, representing high- paying cities, are pushing for a better shelter. Supervisor Foley is protecting the mismanagement.

Excerpts:

The county took in $5.8 million in license fees from pet owners. But that covers only a fraction of OCAC’s budget and left $16.8 million in net expenses. Of this, the county allocated $15.7 million or 93% of the cost to the cities, to be paid out of their municipal budgets.

To recap, the county pays 7% of the billable amount, or $ 1. 2 million, but collects $ 8. 4 million to feed its bureaucracy. That’ s why the county wants to control the ani mal shelter. It’ s revenue for county headquarters.

OCAC is not meeti ng standards on kennel staffi ng, because money is goi ng to overhead rather than rank- and- file staff. county bureaucrats are attempti ng to downgrade shelter standards by “ updati ng” ( read: canceli ng) the Strategi c Plan. They issued an RFP that had only one bi d from some generi c consultant. Then Dylan Wright’ s bureaucracy that consumes millions in admin costs took 4.5 months for “ ranking” one bid. Huh? If this RFP wasn’t malfeasance, it was total incompetence.

It should be invalidated… and investigated.

With good policies, the existing plan is the cost-effective way to serve the companion animals as well as the taxpayers of OC.

In the Board discussion about kennel staffing, Foley chimed in: “ we do intend to follow the NACA gui delines for standards of care in animal shelters, I believe that that’ s the case.” How convenient. Did Foley look up the recommendation of the county’s own consultants to see that OCAC is falling way sho rt of these standards? Let me help. Foley can go to pages 4-5 of these excerpts from the JVR recommendations to read: “ Staffing for daily cleaning and feeding based on HSUS, NACA, ASV: … This equates to 26 Full-Time-Equivalent staff members per day.” That’s a careful calculation, done by experts in animal sheltering. Instead, Foley blindly sided with Schmidt’s PR.

Contact the cities that use OCAC and tell them to start exploring other options. If they don’t, the county bureaucracy will corner them into another sucker contract.

OC Register, September 29, 2024
The OC’ s inexcusably badly run animal shelter
https:// enewspaper. ocregister. com/ infinity/ article_ popover_ share. aspx? guid= bc40bdc0- 13d9- 44e7- b6fb- 4c1c55b3ec16& share= true letter to the editor; scroll to the 4th letter down)
OC Register, September 25, 2024
County managers failed our animal shelter
https:// www. ocregister. com/ 2024/ 09/ 24/ county- managers- failed- our- animal- shelter/ No te: There’s a problem in the OC Register app. If that app is on your device, press and hold the link, copy it, and then paste it into your web browser.] If you’re having trouble with the above link, try this Shareable Link. https:// www. ocregister. com/ 2024/ 09/ 24/ county- managers- failed- our- animal- shelter/? share= 2opwholwe04gnaisaeiw As a last resort, there is also a P rint Edition Link but then you don’ t have access to the links embedded inside the article. https://edition.pagesuite.com/popovers/dynamic_article_popover.aspx?guid=b13ee9db-5147-4f55-afd9-44c3bbdcaecd& appcode=OCR108&eguid=6fc45ebd-3c76-43f1-a3afbe1d2ca327cf& pnum=56# OC Register, September 9, 2024
Wo o fy Acres do g rescue under criminal investigatio n, 114 dogs seized by San Bernardino Co unty https://www.ocregister.com/2024/09/09/woofy-acres-dog-rescue-under-criminal-investigation-114-dogs-seized-by-san-bernardino-county/?share=eyrmnnoh0pcao1eddcns There's no denying those dogs were neglected,' said a volunteer with Orange County Animal Care, which sent 149 dogs to the Pinon Hills rescue Voice of OC, September 5, 2024
The OC Animal Shelter Directo r is All Image and No Substance https://voiceofoc.org/2024/09/mavrovouniotis-the-oc-animal-shelter-director-is-all-image-and-no-substance/ The county bureaucracy prefers political spinning over operational knowledge and experience. That’s why they chose Monica Schmidt for OC Animal Care Director. She overstated her animal sheltering qualifications to get the job, and she habitually misleads the community and elected officials.

Voice of OC, August 13, 2024
Yamashiro : Questionable Co ntracts and Understaffed Shelter, A Crisis in OC Animal Care https://voiceofoc.org/2024/08/yamashiro-questionable-contracts-and-understaffed-shelter-a-crisis-in-oc-animal-care/ Are county contracts being issued without proper oversight? A former OC Animal Care employee, now living out of state, received a contract that seems to have produced no tangible results.

Meanwhile, OC Animal Care is understaffing kennels and ignoring the majority of their very expensive 2018 Strategic P lan.

Voice of OC, May 16, 2024
Yamashiro : OC Animal Care – Mismanagement and Public Deception Regarding Small Pets https://voiceofoc.org/2024/05/yamashiro-oc-animal-care-mismanagement-and-public-deception-regarding-small-pets/ OC Animal Care has been involved in transferring small pets to a reptile organization, which subsequently transported them to Arizona. In a related situation, it was reported that small pets from San Diego Humane Society were likely sold in Arizona as snake food. OCAC has not provided clear explanations regarding the fate of these animals, and support from County Supervisors Wagner and Foley has been lacking.

Voice of OC, April 16, 2024
Boyer: A Deteriorating Animal Shelter and Millions in Suspicious Contracts https:// voiceofoc. org/ 2024/ 04/ boyer- a- deteriorating- animal- shelter- and- millions- in- suspicious- contracts/ Is there a problem in county management? We praise and blame County Supervisors. We ignore the top managers in county bureaucracy. One agency, OCCR, is wasting taxpayer dollars and abetting the grim disarray of the animal shelter. What’s hiding behind their disinformation? Chapman P anther ( Chapman University), March 19, 2024
Our co mmunity deserves a decent animal shelter
https://www.thepanthernewspaper.org/opinions/opinion-our-community-deserves-a-decent-animal-shelter Excerpts:

The mismanagement went on too long, and that’s depressingly obvious in the shelter’ s dismal statistics, as exposed in a most recent Orange County Register article. Small steps are not enough.

We already have the blueprint for a well-run shelter: the shelter’ s own strategic plan, which was developed by national experts and unanimously approved by the Board of Supervisors in 2018.

Was that just for show?
By this plan, the shelter should:

Give dogs dai ly opportunities to sociali ze wi th other dogs. Take cats out of their kennels at least three ti mes per week. Log and track these acti vi ti es for each animal.

Mi ni mi ze the ani mals’ length of stay in the shelter. Remove roadblocks to getting ani mals adopted or, when appropriate, rescued. Provi de veteri nary care for ani mals that need it, while maki ng them available for public adoption.

Return at least 45% of stray dogs to thei r owners. Ramp up a program to trap, neuter, and return ( TNR) community cats. Get at least 85% of incomi ng cats adopted or rescued.

Follow nati onal standards written by the Associ ati on of Shelter Veterinari ans ( ASV).

The shelter is way behind on all of these.

Fullerton Observer, March 12, 2024
Mo re Bad News About Orange Co unty Animal Care
https://fullertonobserver.com/2024/03/12/more-bad-news-about-orange-county-animal-care/ Excerpts:

On September 10 last year, the OC animal shelter handed over rescue dogs Baron, Kate, Enzo, and Nevin to the group Woofy Acres. OC staff were concerned. Jaime Link, OCAC Operations Manager, wrote:

We recently had a rescue pi ck- up wi th the li sted representati ve, Di ane ( see PID screenshot), and the shelter team reported that her vehicle emitted an odor of animal waste and gri me remi niscent of most hoardi ng houses. She was also behaving errati cally and yelling at staff in the lobby. The rescuer has recently been pulling a lot of aggressive dogs ( 5 today), and I am concerned they may be going into less-than-ideal conditions.” In the nine prior weeks ( from July 5 to September 8 last year), the OC animal shelter had already given 21 dogs to Woofy Acres. T he shelter gave a total of 128 dogs to Woofy Acres in 2020- 2023.

In February, the OC Register reported that Woofy Acres abandoned 32 dogs at a dog boarding facility last year. Some were in the facility for two years. Woofy Acres is delinquent on its bills and state-mandated paperwork. Almost half of the abandoned dogs were given to Woofy Acres by OC Animal Care in 2021. The OC shelter gave many more dogs to Woofy Acres in 2022 and 2023; what happened to them is unknown.

Spokesperson Alexa Pratt told the Register that “ the agency was unaware of any problems wi th Woofy Acres when it released dogs to the rescue, the last ones going in early January.” But Jaime Link’s September 10, 2023 email tells a different story. OC was very aware of problems through the first-hand observations of conscientious staff.

It is unknown what research the shelter did, but it seems it didn’ t even try to verify Woofy Acres’ s charity status with the state.

Michael Mavrovouniotis, an animal welfare advocate, said, “ Mid-level and frontline OCAC staff love the animals and are doing their best to get good outcomes for them. I applaud Jaime Link and the animal care staff, who spoke up. They did the ri ght thi ng. They showed a better shelter is possible. However, the top managers at the shelter and OC Community Resources don’ t show the same concern for the welfare of the animals in their care. They falsely clai m that they di dn’ t know there were any problems.” The shelter just kept handing animals over to Woofy Acres. In the last five months of 2023, the shelter gave 48 dogs to Woofy Acres after Woofy Acres had already abandoned dogs. Of those, 23 dogs were handed over after Jaime Link’s red-flag email describing erratic behavior and signs of hoarding.

Unaccounted animals include Tate, Bonnie, and Gadget, who came from Fullerton. None of these dogs are in the boarding facility. The shelter booked them as successes in its statistics, but the actual fate of the animals is unknown. OC residents concerned about what happened to these dogs can http://The%20OCAC%20has%20been%20criticized%20for%20not%20tracking%20animals%20in%20its%20statistics,%20giving%20pet%20bunnies,%20hamsters,%20and%20guinea%20pigs%20to%20a%20 era% 20policies.% 20On% 20September% 2010% 20last% 20year,% 20the% 20OC% 20animal% 20shelter% 20handed% 20over% 20rescue% 20dogs% 20Baron,% 20Kate,% 20Enzo,% 20and% 20Nevin% 20to% 20the% the Board of Supervisors and their local elected officials to ask for a full accounting.

OC Register, March 5, 2024
Animal rescue abando ns do zens o f do gs at Ro wland Heights kennel Do gs from OC agency among 32 abandoned by gro up
https://www.ocregister.com/2024/03/04/animal-rescue-abandons-dozens-of-dogs-at-rowland-heights-shelter/ Excerpts:

Especially troubling to ani mal activists is that Orange County Ani mal Care has released 128 dogs to Woofy Acres si nce 2019, accordi ng to county records compiled by acti vi st Mi chael Mavrovouni oti s.

The Orange County shelter just takes the vi ew that we don’ t care who takes the animals as long as we get them off our books,” He believes Orange County Ani mal Care should do a better job of screening ani mal rescues and following up on placements.

It’ s part of ( Orange County’ s) reli ance on rescues,” Mavrovouni otis said. “ The shelter is not doing enough to make adoptions easi er and thei r safety valve is to push as many animals as possible … to rescues.”
OC Register, March 2, 2024
Fewer ‘ fixes’ mean mo re dead cats in Orange County
https://www.ocregister.com/2024/03/01/fewer-fixes-mean-more-dead-cats-in-orange-county/?share=ercnnpt0sef1dsidoota Column: Animal services in Los Angeles, Long Beach, do better, while Riverside is all systems go to ' fix' street cats and reduce deaths Excerpts:

Consi der: The city of Los Angeles racked up a “ li ve outcome” rate of nearly 81% for cats that entered its shelters last year. Just 19% were euthani zed or di ed in care, accordi ng to city data.

Orange County Animal Care, in contrast, racked up li ve outcomes of just 68. 6% for cats. More than 30% were euthani zed or died in care last year. That’ s an 8% jump in the raw number of dead cats over 2019 ( to 1, 925 from 1, 779), even as the total number of impounded cats plunged by nearly a third ( to 6, 393 from 9, 369).

Myri ad studies have found that spayi ng and neuteri ng street cats vastly reduces death.

In 2019, the last year of the street cat spay/ neuter program, 19% of cats di ed or were euthanized at OC Ani mal Care. In 2023, more than 30% di ed or were euthanized.

Today, folks who bri ng healthy street cats to the shelter are turned away and told to return the ani mal to where they found it, rescuers say. And it appears those cats make more cats. Who make more cats. And so on.

To make a dent in the suffering, we can’ t fi x one cat at a ti me, said Romina Yamashi ro. The county must commi t to high- volume, intensi ve TNR targeti ng large feral colonies. It’ s in O. C.’ s strategic plan for the shelter. It’ s been urged by the grand jury. But, alas.

We’ re so frustrated,” she sai d. “ Orange County has a magni fi cent, $ 35 mi lli on faci lity, several surgery sui tes, three or four vets on staff. If we could make that work to provide spay and neuter for feral cats, you’ d see a reduction in intakes and that would help not just the cats in the community, but the people in the community.” The 14 cities that contract with Orange County for animal services — including Anaheim and Santa Ana —should be outraged, she said.

OC Register, February 11, 2024
Fewer do gs, mo re death, at OC Animal Care
https://www.ocregister.com/2024/02/11/fewer-dogs-more-death-at-oc-animal-care/ Column: Comparison of pre- and post- pandemic years show failure of shelter policies, critics charge. But things are changing, shelter asks for support Excerpts:

The “ kill rate” for dogs at Orange County’ s main ani mal shelter shot up markedly under its appointment- centric vi si tati on system, where folks couldn’ t browse the full furry inventory at their leisure, data suggests.

Rather than throwi ng the doors all the way open, Orange County stuck largely to pandemi c protocol last year, preferri ng that people peruse pooch photos online, then make appoi ntments to meet those animals in person. […] “ Concierge service,” they called it.

Critics countered that the system benefitted shelter managers, not animals or the adopting public. It’s easier to not have all those pesky outside eyeballs on your operations, they charged.

Three hours every day is better, criti cs said, but all the kennels wi th adoptable ani mals should welcome the publi c every hour they’ re open.

Nati onally, the number of dogs who were euthanized or who di ed in care rose as well. But whi le that jumped 12% nati onwide, it rose 54% in Orange County. That, Mavrovouni oti s maintai ns, shows O.C. is doing something wrong. “ By any metric I looked at, national trends don’t explain OCAC’ s decline,” he said.

Yes, folks, please, absolutely. Foster! Volunteer! Help our unwanted animals be wanted and loved again! Let them sleep on the bed! We may be a bit naïve, but it seems that supporti ng the shelter, and opening it wider as activists demand, are not necessarily mutually exclusive things.

It’ s quite si mple, really,” said Boyer. “ They need to open up the shelter all the way, all the buildi ngs, so people can walk through and look at all the avai lable dogs. It was worki ng fi ne before COVID. Why don’t you back to doing what you did?”
The numbers, Boyers maintains, understate the full magnitude of the problem. “ Because of slow adoptions, the shelter got severely overcrowded in the fall. A lot of dogs weren’t going to make it out alive, but the hangar fire brought in the ASPCA that saved 100+ dogs.

Under the partial re-opening, the public can view only about 65 to 70 dogs. But the shelter has about 100 dogs available for adoption. Visitors should be able to see all of them in their kennels. The shelter shouldn’ t be hiding 30 to 35 dogs out of sight.” Fullerton Observer, January 2, 2024
Animal Advocates Call for Independent Investigation o f OC Animal Care https://fullertonobserver.com/2024/01/02/animal-advocates-call-for-independent-investigation-of-oc-animal-care/ Excerpts with added web li nks to supporti ng documents:

In just 20 months, OC Animal Care (OCAC) gave 273 rodents, 200 rabbits, and other small pets to a reptile group.

On a recent similar case involving animals from San Diego, the Sacramento Bee reports that: “ Information clearly indicates (the reptile breeder’ s) intention to use these animals as feed instead of finding them adoptive homes.”
Snapshots of email correspondence obtained via Public Record requests show that the OC shelter typically offered many small pets at once. The reptile group then took rodents and rabbits in bulk without asking for precise numbers and types of animals. That’s highly unusual.

OC Animal Care made this reptile group its primary destination for small pets.

In the past, [ the reptile group] has advertised the availability of “ feeder” rodents, including live ones.

An independent outside investigator must be appointed directly by the Board of Supervisors to get a verifiable paper trail for every animal the OC shelter handed over to the reptile group.

OC Register, December 10, 2023
Animal officials promise compassion, but offer euthanasia https:// www. ocregister. com/ 2023/ 12/ 08/ animal- officials- promise- compassion- but- offer- euthanasia/ This item has also been picked up by a think tank and by Newsbreak:
https://www.newsbreak.com/california-state/3266656921694-why-are-california-s-animal-shelters-killing-so-many-pets https://reason.com/2023/12/15/why-are-californias-publicly-funded-animal-shelters-are-killing-so-many-pets/ Excerpt:

Obviously, fewer people will fall in love with a purring or barking buddy if they can’t wander through the kennels and see which animal pulls at their heartstrings. You can no more pick out a pet based on a shelter’ s photo than you can pi ck out a spouse solely on thei r dati ng website bi o. Animal Care increased the number of walk- in visi ts ami d cri ti ci sm, but it’ s sti ll absurdly limi ted and I gave up trying to get info after a really long wai t on its phone li ne.

The bureaucrats who run the faci lity – the largest muni ci pal “ ani mal- care” operati on in the West – depi ct these customer- unfriendly, animal- harmi ng poli ci es as a means to protect the critters from stress and protect the publi c from animal bi tes. In reali ty, it’ s just the latest instance of government putti ng the employees’ convenience above the public good OC Register, December 2, 2023
OC Animal Care so ught to avo id o ptics of sending bunnies to local reptile rescue group https://www.ocregister.com/2023/12/01/oc-animal-care-sought-to-avoid-optics-of-sending-bunnies-to-local-reptile-rescue-group/ Voice of OC, November 22, 2023
The OC Animal Shelter Lied Abo ut Its Safety Reco rd. It Needed an Excuse to Keep the Kennels Off- Limits and Ditch Its Strategic Plan. https://voiceofoc.org/2023/11/mavrovouniotis-the-oc-animal-shelter-lied-about-its-safety-record-it-needed-an-excuse-to-keep-the-kennels-off-limits-and-ditch-its-strategic-plan/ The county misinformed the public and the Grand Jury. It understated the number of bites that occurred at the animal shelter in 2021- 2022. In reality, shelter policies resulted in no safety improvements. False statistics served as a smokescreen for disregarding the Strategic Plan, blocking public access, and lowering animal care standards.

Voice of OC, November 14, 2023
Yamashiro : OC Animal Care Gave Hundreds o f Rabbits, Guinea Pigs, and Birds to a Reptile Gro up. What Happened to Them? https:// voiceofoc. org/ 2023/ 11/ yamashiro- oc- animal- care- gave- hundreds- of- rabbits- guinea- pigs- and- birds- to- a-reptile- group- what- happened- to- them/ Voice of OC, October 25, 2023
Lawther: Animal Shelter Deteriorates as Co unty Bureaucracy Keeps Superviso rs in the Dark https:// voiceofoc. org/ 2023/ 10/ lawther- animal- shelter- deteriorates- as- county- bureaucracy- keeps- supervisors- in- the- dark/ OC Community Resources covered up the deterioration of the animal shelter. It put together a false narrative for internal use, but kept it from the public. Meanwhile, the shelter’ s kill rate is rising, dogs get very little socialization, and data collection is dismal. Why is the shelter flouting its own Strategic Plan? OC Register, October 14, 2023
Advocates ho rrified over mysterious fate of small animals https://www.ocregister.com/2023/10/13/advocates-horrified-over-mysterious-fate-of-small-animals/?share=saaeotyscecmamsaw1ie or
https:// www. ocregister. com/ 2023/ 10/ 13/ advocates- horrified- over- mysterious- fate- of- small- animals/ Voice of OC, September 20, 2023
How to Fix OC Animal Care? Use the Strategic Plan!
https:// voiceofoc. org/ 2023/ 09/ mavrovouniotis- how- to- fix- oc- animal- care- use- the- strategic- plan/ OC Community Resources is mismanaging the animal shelter. More animals are getting killed. Animal care and behavior assessment are substandard, creating dangerous conditions. Kennel staff and volunteers are exhausted. T here’ s a solution: Implement the animal shelter’ s Strategic Plan. Get off pandemic mode. Re- open the kennel areas to adopters.

Voice of OC, August 24, 2023
Barba: OC Animal Care Needs to Get Its Facts Straight
https://voiceofoc.org/2023/08/barba-oc-animal-care-needs-to-get-its-facts-straight/ OCAC is making false claims to cover up its poor performance. It can’ t even count its animals correctly. Although fewer animals are coming in than pre- pandemic, the shelter has higher kill rates and longer stays. More adopted animals end up returned. OCAC has been failing its Strategic P lan – and hiding it.

Fullerton Observer, August 16, 2023 (This is a multi-section article. Make sure you scroll down!) OC residents raise co ncerns o ver OC Animal Care shelter Orange Co unty Tax Payers and Homeless Animals Deserve Better OC Animal Care is co ntinuing to mislead the public
https://fullertonobserver.com/2023/08/16/oc-residents-raise-concerns-over-oc-animal-care-shelter/ Voice of OC, August 7, 2023
Lawther: OC Animal Care is Unable to Keep Track o f its Animals https://voiceofoc.org/2023/08/lawther-oc-animal-care-is-unable-to-keep-track-of-its-animals/ OCAC appears to have fabricated the only 2023 animal statistics it has published so far. We effectively know nothing about current animal intakes, outcomes, or kill rates. What we do know is that their data can’ t be trusted. It’s time for the Board of Supervisor to act.

Los Angeles Times, June 9, 2023
Status quo at O. C. animal shelter ‘ unacceptable’ as euthanasia rates rise, repo rt says https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2023-06-08/orange-county-animal-care-shelter-grand-jury-report-dogs-cats-euthanized KT LA 5 News, June 9, 2023
Grand jury raises co ncerns abo ut OC Animal Care’ s po licies https://ktla.com/news/local-news/grand-jury-raises-concerns-about-oc-animal-cares-policies/ OC Register, June 9, 2023
OC Grand Jury raises concerns with management, animal welfare at OC Animal Care https://www.ocregister.com/2023/06/09/oc-grand-jury-raises-concerns-with-management-animal-welfare-at-oc-animal-care/ Voice of OC, June 8, 2023
Grand Jury: OC Animal Shelter Needs Updated Policies to Sto p Killing More Animals https:// voiceofoc. org/ 2023/ 06/ grand- jury- oc- animal- shelter- needs- updated- policies- to- stop- killing- more- animals/ Fullerton Observer, June 7, 2023
Grand Jury Report: The State o f Animal Welfare Overseen by the Co unty o f Orange https://fullertonobserver.com/2023/06/07/grand-jury-report-the-state-of-animal-welfare-overseen-by-the-county-of-orange/ OC Register, May 11, 2023
OC’ s animal shelter still a killing zo ne
https:// www. ocregister. com/ 2023/ 05/ 11/ ocs- animal- shelter- still- a- killing- zone/ OC Register, May 10, 2023
Revamp Orange County Animal Care shelter po licies, critics tell OC superviso rs https:// www. ocregister. com/ 2023/ 05/ 10/ revamp- orange- county- animal- care- shelter- policies- critics- tell- oc- supervisors/ KNX News, May 8, 2023
Orange Co unty animal shelter kill rates do uble for adult do gs in 3 years https://www.audacy.com/knxnews/news/local/orange-county-animal-shelter-kill-rates-double-in-3-years OC Register, May 7, 2023
Mo re adult do gs dying at OC Animal Care, kennels largely off- limits https://www.ocregister.com/2023/05/07/more-adult-dogs-dying-at-oc-animal-care-kennels-largely-off-limits/?share=tocecdmereiywdporla0 ate: 3/22/2026 12:50:16 PM
From:" Michael Mavrovouniotis" michaelmavrovouniotis@gmail. com To:" Public Comment" publiccomment@anaheim. net
Subject:[ EXTERNAL] Public comment for city council, March 24, 2026, agenda # 17 Warning: This email originated fromoutside the City of Anaheim. Do not click links or open attachme nts unless you recognize the sender and are expecting the message.

Honorable City Council,
I am a volunteer data scientist for the non- profits Social Compassion in Legislation & Social Compassion. I published four peer- reviewed research papers on animal sheltering in the last 19 months. You can find explanations of my research for a general audience here:
https:// www. growkudos. com/ profile/ michael_ mavrovouniotis and the rest of my research profile here:
https:// www. researchgate. net/ profile/ Michael- Mavrovouniotis At the moment, OC Animal Care is your only option. Understandably, you’ ll sign the contract. But you can, in addition:

Tell OC Animal Care that you expect them to follow their 2018 Strategic Plan, approved unanimously by the Board of Supervisors. That’ s the performance standard, not whatever a random manager decides from one month to the next.

Tell city staff to study an alternative: An animal shelter that is community- centered and practices prevention rather than reaction. Such a shelter would save money for the city, because prevention is more cost- effective, and because the community would contribute via donations and volunteering. In case you didn’ t know it… Any donations currently offset the county’ s cost share for the unincorporated areas, but not the cities. If somebody leaves a $ 500, 000 bequest to the shelter, it doesn’ t change the city’ s costs or the services, it only reduces the county’ s out- of-pocket cost by $500, 000. ate: 3/24/2026 5:43:50 PM
From:" Stephanie Mercadante" burglin.stephanie@gmail. com To:" Public Comment" [email protected]
Subject:[ EXTERNAL] Residents Demand Clarity onWater Safety, PFAS, and Perchlorate Contamination Warning: This email originated fromoutside the City of Anaheim. Do not click links or open attachme nts unless you recognize the sender and are expecting the message.

Councilmembers,
Do you, as Councilmembers, actually know without hesitation that Anaheim’s drinking water is safe? Have you asked that question recently? Because residents are paying attention, and they are documenti ng what they see.

In Anaheim Hills, people have recorded repeated hydrant flushing. Hydrant flushing can be normal when it is routine maintenance. But when it happens right before water testing, it raises a different question. It raises the question of whether the City is trying to clean out the system so the results look better than what residents drink every day.

Here is why this matters.

On September 17, 2025, a valve was opened 22 percent. On September 23, it was opened to about 50 percent. Opening a valve like that pushes a huge amount of water through the pipes. That can temporari ly make the water appear cleaner, but it does not reflect normal conditions. Turbidity should be between .01 and .06. On September 23, it jumped to 3.2. That is not a small difference. That is a sign that something is wrong.

So the public deserves a straight answer. Why was so much water flushed right before testing? Was the City trying to influence the results? Or is Anaheim simply comfortable wasting hundreds of thousands of gallons of water without explanation?
Then there is Well 51, which serves West Anaheim. The State notified the City that this well had elevated PFOS levels. PFOS is part of the PFAS family. These are forever chemicals. They do not break down. They stay in the soil, they stay in the water, and they stay in our bodies. They are linked to cancer and long term health problems.

Residents deserve to know when the City was notified, whether the well was shut down immediately, and whether the public was told the truth or left drinking contaminated water without knowing it.

We also need to talk about perchlorates. These chemicals are used in rocket fuel, explosives, and fireworks. They interfere with the thyroid and can affect metabolism and child development. Anaheim’s own water data has shown elevated perchlorate levels in certain areas. Fireworks fallout is a known source of perchlorate contamination. So when the City insists fireworks are harmless, yet perchlorates show up in the water, residents have every right to question that narrative.

And here is the part the City avoids.

Why are residents paying for the cleanup? Why are families and taxpayers covering the cost of PFAS and perchlorate remediation while the companies that created the contamination are shielded from any real accountabili ty? Forgive me for being facetious. We all know why. Those polluters are the people this City actually serves.

They get protection. Residents get the bill. This is the pattern.

When residents raise concerns, the City minimizes them. When data looks bad, the focus shifts to optics instead of solutions.

When transparency is needed, the public gets silence.

Before we hear another polished statement about rejecting the premise of the question, Iwill leave you with this:

You and your families are drinking this water too.

This is not political. It is about safety.

Is the water safe or not? If it is safe, show the proof. If it is not, tell the truth.

Thank you.
ate: 3/21/2026 4:37:07 PM
From:" S R" [email protected]
To:" Ryan Balius" [email protected], "Public Comment" publiccomment@anaheim. net Cc:" City Clerk" [email protected]
Subject:[
EXTERNAL] Meeting 3-24-26 Agenda Items 24 & 25 – Anaheim Hills Festival Project (DEV2023-00043) – Response to Rehearing Denial and Related Actions
Warning: This email originated fromoutside the City of Anaheim. Do not click links or open attachme nts unless you recognize the sender and are expecting the message.

Date: 3/21/ 26
Honorable Councilmember Ry an Balius,
Thank you for your time and consideration of this matter. I rec ognize the complex ity of the issues befo re you and the responsibility inv olv ed in balancing community needs, dev elopment, and public safety . This response is offered in good faith and is intentionally focused on a small number of key proc edural and analy tical considerations that remain unresolv ed in the record and are important to ensuring a complete and informed decision- making process.

1. Incomplete Wildfire Evacuation Analysis
The City acknowledges that a comprehensiv e wildfire ev ac uation plan is currently in dev elo pment, yet the Projec t was appro ved prio r to completion of that analy sis. This raises a fundamental conc ern under CEQA, which requires dec isio ns to be based on the best av ailable information— particularly where public safety is at stake.

The ev acuation analy sis relied upon in the EIR does not appear to incorporate:

Updated regional traffic conditions
Real- world human behav ior during emergenc y ev ac uations Cumulativ e impacts across known bottlenecks and constrained ev acuation routes Approv ing the Projec t while a City -initiated ev ac uation study remains incomplete creates a disc onnec t between ac knowledged risk and the conclusions relied upon for approv al.

2. Procedural Limitations on Public Participation
The administrativ e record reflects that the public hearing was formally closed on January 1 3, 20 26, while deliberations and consideratio n of the Projec t continued thereafter. Although general public comment was permitted at subsequent meetings, this is no t equiv alent to partic ipation within an open public hearing tied to ac tiv e deliberation.

This distinc tion matters. Meaningful partic ipation under CEQA is intended to occ ur within the dec ision- making framewo rk itself, where public input can direc tly inform the outc ome. The struc ture used here limited that opportunity .

3. Departure from Adopted Public Comment Procedures
The Project involved legislativ e components, yet public comment was limited to three minutes per speaker without a clear ex planation in the record for dev iating from the City ’s standard five-minute alloc ation for legislativ e matters.

Adherenc e to established proc edures is essential to maintaining consistenc y and public trust. Where dev iations occur, the basis for tho se decisions should be clearly doc umented.

4. Inconsistent Project Description – Parking Discrepancy The administrativ e record contains conflic ting information regarding required parking:

Draft EIR: 1 ,07 5 spaces
Parking Study : 963 spaces
While this disc repancy has been acknowledged, it does not appear to hav e been fully reconc iled in the record. A stable and internally consistent projec t desc ription is foundational under CEQA , as it directly informs the analy sis and the findings relied upon for appro val.

5. Access to Information and Transparency
Certain materials requested during the rev iew proc ess, including internal communications and tec hnic al ev aluations, were not made av ailable.

These materials are relev ant to understanding how key analy ses—particularly those related to fire safety and ev ac uation—were ev aluated and relied upon.

Access to this information supports informed public participation and confidence in the dec isio n-making proc ess.

Conclusion
his response is not intended to restate the full appeal, but rather to highlight a set of focused consideratio ns that remain unresolv ed in the administrativ e record. Taken together, these issues raise important questions about whether the Projec t was rev iewed and appro ved based on a complete and procedurally consistent framework.

At minimum, the record reflects:

Approv al prior to com pletion of a com prehensiv e ev acuation analy sis Lim itations on meaningful public participation during deliberation Inc onsistenc ies in core projec t data
Dev iations from standard procedural practic es
For these reasons, I respectfully request that the Council grant the appeal, or at minimum, remand the matter for further analy sis and proc edural clarific ation to ensure that the decision is based on a complete and consistent rec ord.

This correspondenc e is submitted to ensure the administrativ e record ac curately reflec ts the pro cedural and analy tic al issues raised prior to final action.

Respectfully Submitted,
Shelly Robbins
shelly.n.robbins@gmail. com
81 41 E. Kennedy Rd, Anaheim, CA
ate: 3/21/2026 4:41:56 PM
From:" S R" [email protected]
To:" Carlos A. Leon" [email protected], "Public Comment" publiccomment@anaheim. net Cc:" [email protected]" [email protected] Subject:[
EXTERNAL] Meeting 3-24-26 Agenda Items 24 & 25 – Anaheim Hills Festival Project (DEV2023-00043) – Response to Rehearing Denial and Related Actions
Warning: This email originated fromoutside the City of Anaheim. Do not click links or open attachme nts unless you recognize the sender and are expecting the message.

Date: 3/ 21 /26
Honorable Councilmember Carlos Leon,
Thank you for your time and consideration of this matter. I rec ognize the complex ity of the issues befo re you and the responsibility inv olv ed in balancing community needs, dev elopment, and public safety . This response is offered in good faith and is intentionally foc used on a small number of key proc edural and analy tical considerations that remain unresolv ed in the rec ord and are important to ensuring a complete and informed decision- making process.

1. Incomplete Wildfire Evacuation Analysis
The City acknowledges that a comprehensiv e wildfire ev acuation plan is currently in dev elopment, yet the Projec t was appro ved prio r to completion of that analy sis. This raises a fundamental conc ern under CEQA, which requires dec isio ns to be based on the best av ailable information—particularly where public safety is at stake.

The ev ac uation analy sis relied upon in the EI R does not appear to incorporate:

Updated regional traffic conditions
Real- world human behav ior during emergenc y ev acuations Cumulativ e impacts across known bottlenecks and constrained ev acuation routes Approv ing the Projec t while a City -initiated ev ac uation study remains incomplete creates a disc onnec t between ac knowledged risk and the conclusions relied upon for approv al.

3. Departure from Adopted Public Comment Procedures
The Project inv olv ed legislativ e components, yet public comment was limited to three minutes per speaker without a clear ex planation in the record for dev iating from the City ’s standard fiv e-minute alloc ation for legislativ e matters.

Adherenc e to established proc edures is essential to maintaining consistenc y and public trust. Where dev iations occur, the basis for tho se decisions should be clearly doc umented.

4. Inconsistent Project Description – Parking Discrepancy The administrativ e record contains conflic ting information regarding required parking:

Draft EIR: 1 ,07 5 spaces
Parking Study : 963 spaces
While this disc repancy has been acknowledged, it does not appear to hav e been fully reconc iled in the rec ord. A stable and internally consistent projec t desc ription is foundational under CEQA , as it directly informs the analy sis and the findings relied upon for appro val.

5. Access to Information and Transparency
Certain materials requested during the rev iew proc ess, including internal communications and technic al ev aluations, were not made av ailable.

These materials are relev ant to understanding how key analy ses—particularly those related to fire safety and ev acuation—were ev aluated and relied upon.

Ac cess to this information supports informed public participation and confidence in the dec isio n-making proc ess.

Conclusion
This response is not intended to restate the full appeal, but rather to highlight a set of focused consideratio ns that remain unresolv ed in the dministrativ e record. Taken together, these issues raise important questions about whether the Projec t was rev iewed and appro ved based on a complete and procedurally consistent framework.

At minimum, the record reflects:

This correspondenc e is submitted to ensure the administrativ e record ac curately reflec ts the pro cedural and analy tic al issues raised prior to final action.

Respectfully Submitted,
Shelly Robbins
shelly.n.robbins@gmail. com
81 41 E. Kennedy Rd, Anaheim, CA
ate: 3/21/2026 4:44:55 PM
From:" S R" [email protected]
To:" Ashleigh Aitken" [email protected], " Public Comment" publiccomme nt@anahe im.net Cc:" City Clerk" [email protected]
Subject:[
EXTERNAL] Meeting 3-24-26 Agenda Items 24 & 25 – Anaheim Hills Festival Project (DEV2023-00043) – Response to Rehearing Denial and Related Actions
Warning: This email originated fromoutside the City of Anaheim. Do not click links or open attachme nts unless you recognize the sender and are expecting the message.

Date: 3/ 21 /26
Honorable May or Aitken,
Thank you for your continued leadership and thoughtful engagement on this matter. I apprec iate the care and consideration you hav e already brought to ev aluating the Anaheim Hills Festiv al Project. As the Counc il considers Agenda Items 24– 25 , I am offering this foc used response in good faith to highlight sev eral procedural and analy tic al considerations that remain relev ant to ensuring a complete and well- suppo rted decision- making process.