1 BENNETT, STACY
From: Barbara Morihiro <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 7, 2022 11:59 AM
To: CITY CLERK
Subject: catalytic converter thefts
The city of Costa Mesa needs to be more proactive in the prevention of catalytic converter thefts, and catching the criminals and those businesses that enable them. Too many residents are finding missing catalytic converters from their cars, parked legally at their homes or our local businesses. Please find the best ways to correct this problem.
Thank you,
Barbara Morihiro
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Report any suspicious activities to the Information Technology Department.
June 7, 2022
Via Email
Costa Mesa City CouncilLori Ann Farrell Harrison, City ManagerRaja Sethuraman, Public Services Director77 Fair DriveCosta Mesa, CA [email protected]@[email protected] Dear Members of the City Council, City Manager Farrell Harrison and Director Sethuraman:
I write to you today to strongly encourage allocating additional resources to renovating andexpanding our public parks, in particular Harper Park and Brentwood Park. As I have alreadyoutlined my views on Harper Park in a prior email, I want to address the opportunities inBrentwood Park, as well as the concern that spending on the Eastside will contribute to “parkinequality”.
As you know, Brentwood Park has been allocated $250,000 for FY 2022-2023 and an additional$100,000 for FY 2023-2024 (see Item 18 of the CIP). First, I am delighted to see this, asBrentwood Park has been struggling to get started on a renovation project for over a decade.However, given the current inflationary environment, the size of Brentwood Park, and itspotential for multiple improvements with citywide benefit, the overall 2-year budget of $350,000is woefully inadequate. For comparison, the renovation of Grant Howald Park in Corona Del Marcost $6.3 million. Closer to home, just replacing the playground equipment in Tanager Park hascost $223,525. Therefore, $350,000 will barely cover the cost of grading, resurfacing andreplacing the playground. And even these modest improvements may be put out of reach bymaterials and labor costs that are experiencing high rates of inflation.
So merely bringing the project up to the threshold of feasibility is one concern. But I also want tobe sensitive to the fairness concerns raised by members of the City Council when money isspent on the Eastside, which has relatively better park access than other parts of the city. Ibelieve that focusing on resource allocation misses a big part of the equity equation, whichshould also factor in the extent to which parks balance both neighborhood and communityneeds.
Costa Mesa’s parks should serve both the surrounding neighborhood and the largercommunity It is undeniable that Costa Mesa lacks sufficient park space. This is especially true on theWestside, which has been historically “underparked”. I agree that this means we should devote significant resources to improving and expanding Westside parks. However, our limited amountof greenspace also means that we need to maximize the value of each existing park. Therefore,we do not have the luxury of maintaining parks that only serve their immediate neighbors.Rather, our parks must strike a balance between serving as neighborhood assets and providingimportant community amenities.
Serving a larger community always comes with costs. Additional parkgoers mean more traffic,more trash, and more park upkeep. It also means bringing in residents from other parts of thecity, from other cities in the county, or even tourists from across the country. Therefore, it isentirely appropriate to be sensitive to the surrounding neighborhood’s concerns regarding thesetopics.
However, it is city leaders, with a broader perspective and a deeper understanding of thecommunity’s needs as a whole, who can see whether a park’s shortcomings are implicitlylimiting its use. They are also better positioned to determine what the larger community’s needsare, and how best to address them.
Unfortunately, Brentwood Park serves its neighbors far better than it serves the largercommunity. For example, there are no paved paths allowing persons in wheelchairs or usingwalkers to access either the playground or the picnic shelter, or even to traverse across thepark. Similarly, parents and caregivers pushing strollers have difficulty navigating the unevenground. Families that wish to hold parties in the park will have to contend with the lack ofbathroom facilities and water fountains. And despite having plenty of space for a field or playingsurface, the only built-in amenity is a poorly maintained volleyball court. I doubt organized sportgroups give the park more than passing consideration when there is no place to play. All thesesmall details add up to a place that may adequately serve its surrounding neighborhood but isnot integrated into a larger park system.
Additionally, this unbalanced approach effectively closes the park off to residents from the otherpart of the city, and implicitlylowersthe amountof greenspace available to such residents.Brentwood Park may not be within walking distance for most residents, but it certainly isaccessible via car and it is becoming increasingly accessible by bicycle. Therefore, it doesn’tseem particularly fair to ask that the Westside, in exchange for additional investment, alsoshoulder the burden of providing all of the city’s community-wide assets such as playing fields,event spaces, greenspaces with bathroom and water facilities, and adequateparking/accessibility.
The Opportunities for Brentwood Park
Believe it or not, Brentwood Park is the second largest park in District 6 (behind Jordan Park,the biggest, and tied with Heller Park). It is also the only meaningfully sized area of greenspacein the upper Eastside, and it is the only accessible playground for older children in the area.With those features in mind, here are just a few communitywide opportunities the city couldrealize in Brentwood Park, without compromising its integrity as a neighborhood asset:
2 - Adding a small playing field.The large greenspaceon the North end of the park islarge enough to accommodate a small playing field. The City’s many youth sportsprograms would instantly gain another field for little kids to play and practice field sports,and it would free up facilities in other parks, such as Harper and Jordan, for use by olderchildren or adults. Maintaining such a field as an open greenspace would allow existinguses to continue when the field isn’t in use. This dual use is well established and workswell in Harper Park. - Create a community gathering space.On the other sidethe park, theplayground/shelter space could easily be expanded and refined to provide a wonderfulvenue for parties, cookouts and community gatherings. Innovative rope-basedplayscapes, such as the very large one recently installed in the Huntington BeachCentral Park, can provide plenty of challenge for kids of all ages while maintaining arelatively small footprint and minimizing noise. And adding additional shelter space, aswell as a city-installed BBQ and a small bathroom 1 ,would maximize the usefulness ofthe park for residents of all abilities and as well as those traveling from otherneighborhoods. - Establish zones that minimize conflicts among diverse, simultaneous uses. Thefact is that we are radically lacking in dog park space, so finding a way for dogs andother park users to coexist in the same space is far more efficient than carving outsingle-use dog runs. Fencing off the playground from both the street and the rest of thepark would provide a safe place for children to play and keep dogs separated and out ofthe street. If successful, this approach could provide a template for other parksexperiencing mixed use to copy. - Build a multiuse path to create a cohesive space.Finally, adding at least onemultiuse walkway through the park connecting the greenspace on the North side with theplayground on the South side would allow all users to access the park’s facilities,including those with strollers, wheelchairs or walkers.
It isn’t realistic to expect all of these renovations to occur at once. But the city should set aroadmap to a comprehensive plan, with as much community input as it can gather, and allocatea sufficient amount of resources to realize it. Perhaps that will look very different from the ideas Ilay out above. At the end of the day, the specific renovations are less important. The biggestconcern is to prevent losing full access to the few greenspaces we have through inaction and“benign” neglect. 1 I recognize placing a public bathroom in a “neighborhood” park is likely to be extremely unpopular.However, I would note that the lack of bathroom facilities strongly limits the use of the park by residentsoutside the contiguous neighborhood, especially for those residents that are very young, very old ordisabled. Concerns about safety and misuse should be taken seriously. But those concerns should beaddressed through facility design and maintenance plans, rather than by removing amenities all together(or preventing them from existing in the first place). Otherwise, we are accepting that certain parks areimplicitly exclusive, and not intended for use by the public as a whole. 3 The COVID-19 pandemic has proven that city investment in the bedrock fundamentals of localgovernment – streets and roads, public safety, and public amenities – is always a good bet. Andas COVID-19 continues to be a threat, we need to strengthen our parks more than ever. Theyhave served as lifeboats for our kids and the safest point of human contact for so manyvulnerable people. Please consider devoting the resources to our parks that our residents oftoday and of tomorrow deserve.
Best,Jenn Tanaka321 [email protected]
CC:Jennifer Rosales ([email protected])Brenda Green ([email protected]) 4 1
BENNETT, STACY
From: Roberto Herrera <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 7, 2022 11:59 AM
To: CITY CLERK
Cc: Gerardo Lopez; Victor Valladares
Subject: Public Comment
Attachments: FinalVersion_Deep Canvass Summary of Findings (1).pdf; Spanish Summary of Findings in CM (1).pdf
Hello City Council,
Attached you will find a report our organization has been working to put together.
This report is the culmination of relationship building we have been having with the Latino community in Costa Mesa since the beginning of the year.
In February this year, we gathered input from 1,215 residents from an initial survey where we assessed whether Costa Mesa’s residents were aware of the city’s budget passing process. We found that 93.3% of those surveyed were unfamiliar with the process. In that same survey we also asked the voter to identify the top issues they are facing. Overwhelmingly, they shared that “housing insecurity” is the most pressing issue.
Additionally, in April we reengaged the previous voters and were able to conduct 211 deep canvass conversations to further understand their situation in relation to “housing insecurity.”
One of the more critical issues that emerged from our deep canvass conversations was for the need of the City
to address the rising rent the Latino community is facing.
Investment in robust and diverse youth programs to meet the needs of Latino youth
Support for building the infrastructure to connect the immigrant community to the much needed legal services.
In summary, the Latino community expressed their desire for the City of Costa Mesa to do more to meet the rising needs of the residents of the city. It is our hope that this report is able to highlight the voices and needs of the Latino community in Costa Mesa as you prepare to adopt the 2022-2023 budget.
2 Best,
Roberto Carlos Herrera
Pronouns (They/Them/Theirs)
Leadership Development Director
Resilience Orange County
1415 E 17th St Suite 100B Santa Ana, CA 92705
Email: [email protected]
www.resilienceoc.org
THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY TO WHICH IT IS ADDRESSED AND MAY CONTAIN INFORMATION THAT IS PRIVILEGED, CONFIDENTIAL AND EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE UNDER APPLICABLE LAW. IF THE READER OF THIS
MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT OR THE EMPLOYEE OR AGENT RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING THE MESSAGE TO THE
INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS COMMUNICATION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Report any suspicious activities to the Information Technology Department.
Summary of FindingsDeep Canvass Conversations with Latino Voters in Costa Mesa 1 Acknowledgements
Data Collecting Team Tanya ValQuyen GenesisPriscila AndreaVictor ValladaresWriters & Editors Roberto HerreraGerardo LopezGraphics & DesignOswaldoFarias About Resilience Orange CountyResilience Orange County is an organization working to strengthen leadership of color towardscommunity transformation. We work to inform and inspire communities of color to thrive andbuild a just future. To learn more, visit: www.resilienceoc.org/. 2 Table of Contents
Part 1 Introduction 4Part 2 Campaigns 5Part 3 Narratives 9Part 4 Closing 12 3 1. Introduction
Resilience Orange County is a social justice organization founded on the notion of communities advocating forthemselves to imagine a better future. Our work started in Santa Ana, however, after a decade of base-buildingthere, we identified other areas in neighboring cities that merited our support to invest in and uplift communitiesof color. Costa Mesa was identified as a community that our organization would like to support and uplift itspeople of color to imagine and build a better future for themselves, their families, and their neighbors. Ourdecision to move forward with Costa Mesa was based on the need to invest more resources for the City’sLatino population.
All of our Participatory Research programs are 501c3 efforts and work to deepen our relationship with peopleof color. Since the beginning of the year, we have developed three campaigns in Costa Mesa. In our last twocampaigns, we have been in collaboration with OCCET. The Orange County Civic Engagement Table(OCCET) is a nonpartisan (501c3) regional table dedicated to engaging voters year-round. This progressiveAAPI-Latinx-Labor-Environmental Justice Alliance seeks to build progressive transformation of our region soeveryone is treated equitably and with justice. Several organizations in Orange County anchor OCCET in citiesaround the county. These anchor organizations serve the emerging majority of the county – low incomeimmigrant Latinx and Asian American communities.They work across issues of immigrant, economic, andracial justice across the county. Through this innovative partnership, OCCET is committed to increasing thequality, scale and effectiveness of civic participation in communities of color and among low-incomepopulations in Orange County. 4 2. Campaigns:
TimelineBetween February 3rd, 2022 and March 9th, 2022, Resilience OC’sfirst campaignreached1215 votersthrough phone banking and door-to-door canvassing.While our initial contact rate was slow, over this timeperiod it improved. As it turned out, our initial phone banking efforts were crucial in building up the relationshipsthat would allow for our door-to-door efforts to be more fruitful as our campaigns went on. These earlyconversations aimed to gather feedback on the following three questions: (1) How familiar are you with thecity’s budget passing process? (2) What are the top 3 issues affecting you? (3) How important is it for the cityto support and connect with the immigrant community in Costa Mesa?93.3%of the voters we spoke withshared that theywere not familiar with the budgetpassing process. According to the responses we gathered,“housing insecurity”was by far the most common issuefaced by Costa Mesa residents. Participants alsoshared anoverwhelming supportfor the City of CostaMesa to do more to support andconnect with theirimmigrant neighbors.
Data on Budget Familiarity● 1215 Total Voters○ 1134 said NO (93.3%)○ 81 said YES (6.6%) 5 Data on Immigration Question● Total Voters: 1,128○ 1 Supper Opposes [43] - (3.8%)○ 2 Lean Oppose [23] - (2%)○ 3 Neutral [121] - (10.7%)○ 4 Learn Support [198] - (17.5%)○ 5 - Super Supportive [743] - (65.8%) Top Issue - Housing InsecurityOur data shows that “housing insecurity” is theoverwhelming and pressing issue the Latinocommunity is facing in Costa Mesa. One votershared they would vote to support their neighborsbecause they know a lot of them are gettingdisplaced. The voter shared they want to make suretheir community stays intact.
Our second campaignin Costa Mesa ran from March 21st,2022 through April 24th, 2022, where wereengaged the same voters from earlier in the year. Our continued presence in the community led to211in-person deep canvassing conversations, which wasabout 17% of those contacted in our initial outreachefforts. In this second pass we offered possible solutions (like a rental assistance fund, a youth fund and aimmigration legal defense fund) to issues that were identified in the earlier campaign. . We asked for theirfamiliarity with the programs, gathered their thoughts on the fund and closed with a direct ask if they wouldsupport such a program. All three funds (rental assistance, youth, and legal defense) fared well with Latinovoters in Costa Mesa. 6 Rental Assistance Fund Youth Fund Legal Defense Fund
We asked: How familiar are you [thevoter] with a rental assistance fund? We then shared the followinginformation about District 4● Data from the City shows that80% of the population inDistrict 4 are renters.Mostdon’t own their home and paymonthly rent.● District 4 also has one of thehighest rates for multi-familyhomes - meaning there aremore than 1 family living ineach household.
We asked: How familiar are you[the voter] with a youth fund? We then shared the followinginformation about District 4● District 4 has one of thehighest youth populations.32% of the population are18 and under.
We asked: How familiar are you [thevoter] with a legal defense fund? We then shared the followinginformation about District 4● District 4 has the highestimmigrant population.39% ofthe district residents areimmigrants.Compare this toDistrict 6 whose immigrantpopulation makes up 11% of thedistrict's total population. *** The City categorized Immigration into twocategories; “naturalized,” & “immigrant.”“Immigrant” is defined by the city of Costa Mesaas individuals who are foreign born includinglegal permanent residents, DACA recipients,asylum seekers, temporary visa holders, andundocumented community members.This datapoint can be found on the City’s redistrictingwebsite. It is the adopted Redistricting Map 115.
Our follow up included theseprobing question
● Have you or your neighborsseen an increase in rent overthe past few years? If yes, whatimpact has that had?● Does having higher rent makeit harder and harder for you topay for your other bills orexpenses? What expenseshave you had to cut to makeends meet?● If the City offered a pilot rentalassistance program, would yoube interested in being part ofthat program? Our follow up included theseprobing question
● Do you know any youth whoyou think would benefit frombeing preoccupied withpositive youth developmentactivities?● If the City was to pass ayouth program, are thereany programs you would beinterested in seeing?● Do you think theseprograms will benefit youthand their social emotionalwellbeing? Our follow up included theseprobing question
● Do you think deportationsimpact families andcommunities? If so, in whatways?● Do you personally know anyonewho may identify as animmigrant?● Do you think a legal defensefund would benefit the Latinocommunity in Costa Mesa? 7 If the voter expressed anunwillingness to support the fundbecause of potential increasedtaxes . . .
We explained to them the city wouldn’tcollect more taxes but rather reallocateexisting revenue the city already has.
If the voter expressed anunwillingness to support thefund because of potentialincreased taxes . . .
We explained to them the citywouldn’t collect more taxes butrather reallocate existing revenuethe city t they already has If the voter expressed anunwillingness to support the fundbecause of potential increased taxes. . .
We explained to them the citywouldn’t collect more taxes but ratherreallocate existing revenue that the cityalready has We closed with a direct ask forsupport● Would you [the voter] supportthe fund? We closed with a direct ask forsupport● Would you [the voter]support fund? We closed with a direct ask forsupport● Would you [the voter] supportfund? After reviewing all three funds with the voter,weasked them to prioritize one. This was a difficult question, asall three funds fared well with the voters, being that each fund met a portion of their needs. Their decision toselect one fund over the others did not mean they were not supportive of all three funds. In fact, in many casesthe voters would prioritize all three if given the opportunity.
Total In-Person Deep Canvass Conversations:211 Conversations● (131) or62%of Latino votersprioritized a Rental Assistance Fund● (45) or21%of Latino votersprioritized a Youth Fund● (35) or17%of Latino votersprioritized a Legal DefenseFund 8 3. Narratives:
The following summaries below illustrate the narratives and stories voters shared with us that highlight theneed for Costa Mesa to do more in an effort to meet the rising crises they are facing. These crises included thefinancial stress imposed by rising rent, the lack of developmental opportunities for youth (both academic andextracurricular), the need for local civic engagement efforts, and the lack of legal infrastructure and financialsupport to aid the immigrant community in Costa Mesa.
The Latino community in Costa Mesa emphasized the immediate and residual impacts of COVID. Theyexpressed how the pandemic still continues to impact almost all aspects of their lives, including their mental &physical health as well as their financial stability. Voters shared that the crisis of COVID is not over and theirneed for support has only grown since then.
Deep Canvass Narratives for Youth Fund● Super supportive of the Youth Fund to secure a brighter future for Costa Mesa’s youth -Latinovoters shared that they were very supportive of the City of Costa Mesa investing in ayouth fund. Theyshared that a primary motive to their conclusion to support a youth fund was based on the need for theirchildren to succeed in life as a way of securing their family’s future.● Variety of programs to meet the community needs -Latino voters expressed the need for youthprograms to be expansive and diverse tomeet the needsof youth of all ages.○ Youth Age Ranges■ Small children & Toddlers■ Youth 6 years to 12 years old■ Youth 18 and under■ Young adults under 25○ Diversity of Youth Programs■ Childcareprograms to support community members’ abilityto work and support theirfamily■ After-school Programsbefore parents are able to returnhome from work and pick uptheir children from school so they are not left at home alone■ Educational supportlike helping youth with homeworkassignments or tutors■ Recreational, social and sports programsthat arenot related to school or tutoring■ Mental health services and resourcesto address risingstress or other health strategiesfor mental wellness 9 Deep Canvass Narratives for Legal Defense Fund● Super Supportive for Immigration Legal Support in Costa Mesa○ Latino voters shared that they were very supportive of thelegal defense fundto support theimmigrant community in Costa Mesa. Some of the voters expressed their displeasure fordeportations and family separation as they empathized with the hardships that come with raisinga family on their own.○ Other voters, while not directly impacted, showed compassion and empathy and understood thesignificance a legal defense fund can have on their families, neighbors and loved ones.○ In reference to the fund, voters shared that the City of Costa Mesa should do more to providethe financial support, including assistance with an immigration attorney and other efforts thatwould make the City of Costa Mesa welcoming for its undocumented residents. ● Infrastructure to Support the Immigrant Community in Costa Mesa○ A narrative emerged that voters would love to see the City of Costa Mesa aid in centralizinglegal support services within the city to make it easier for the immigrant community to accesslegal services.○ Voters shared that it takes a considerable amount of time to get to Santa Ana, where a majorityof non-profit legal service providers are located. The burden comes for the immigrant communityas they have to work less hours to account for any travel time or appointment unavailability,coupled with the unpredictability and prolonged travel times that it takes to reach Santa Ana bypublic transportation, as mentioned by another resident. ● Mixed Status Families○ Based on the deep canvass conversations with Latino voters, there were different ways thatthey connected with, or were in relationship to, the immigrant community in Costa Mesa. Votersdirectly shared having undocumented family members or knowing someone in Costa Mesaincluding their extended family members, the elderly, their friends and neighbors who are part ofthe immigrant community. Others expressed explicitly knowing youth in Costa Mesa who areundocumented, while some shared their parents are undocumented. ● Understanding Immigration Legal Defense & Due Process Rights○ One voter shared their hesitancy to support a legal defense fund as they were under theimpression that everyone is already entitled to an attorney, regardless of whether or not they area citizen. After discussing how due process rights are not guaranteed in immigration court andthe need for an immigration attorney is high, even for Costa Mesa residents, this voterexpressed being a lean supporter of this initiative.○ Another voter was confused and thought that the immigrant community would have to pay moretaxes. When we explained that it would not affect the amount they would be taxed, but ratherthat the City would reallocate existing funding it already has, the voter then expressed strongsupport for the fund. 10 Deep Canvass Narratives for Rental Assistance● Super Supportive of a Rental Assistance Fund○ In many of our deep canvass conversations, Latino voters overwhelmingly supported the ideaof the City developinga rental assistance fundtomeet these rising needs and changes in CostaMesa. In many of these conversations, many mentions were made in reference to strongerprotections and mitigation efforts to address the issue of “housing insecurity.” Some votersmade reference to efforts the City of Santa Ana has passed to relieve some of the financial andhousing stress renters are facing including rental assistance and rent control .● Rising Rent -Overwhelmingly,“rising rent”stoodout the most in our deep canvass conversationswith Latino voters in Costa Mesa. Below are varying narratives they shared.○ Rent Paid Per Month■ While we only captured what voters were willing to share, some shared paying $2,100for a 1 bedroom. However, many residents shared annual rent increases of $100 or $110on average, with one resident mentioning having to bear two rent increases in a year.Some residents mentioned that while rent would increase, the conditions of their homeor apartment would not.■ “Fixed Income”came up often in our conversations with the Latino community in CostaMesa. Residents expressed fear in their ability to meet the rising rent, including all theirliving expenses. These residents were mostly elderly and others mentioned Section 8housing.○ Mitigation Efforts like Rent Control■ “Rent control” was also mentioned several times in our deep canvas conversations withLatino voters. They had a general understanding of “rent control” as a mitigationeffortto address their needs, vocalized support forit and some even had families inneighboring cities like Santa Ana, where they have enacted such policies to protectrenters.■ Some voters also spoke candidly about “gentrification”and its impact on rising rent anddisplacement.○ Financial Stress■ Several times in our conversations, voters expresseddeep financial stressabout therising rent. In a similar thread, the Latino community expressed a “sense of urgency”where such programs to mitigate rising rent “can’t wait for tomorrow.” Shrouded in doubt,they shared these programs would not come soon enough to meet their needs. OtherLatino community members shared a sense of “displacement,” a sense of being on theway out, on the verge of eviction, or feeling pushed out of the City. One resident sharedalready planning on leaving the City because they can no longer afford it. 11 ● Multi-Family coming together to Pay 1 Rent○ The second most documented topic that emerged from our deep canvass conversations withLatino voters was their need to live together to pay 1 rent (Multi-Family households). Whilesome did not disclose who they live with particularly, others did including extended familymembers and roommates. Some expressed their inability to pay the rising rent, inability to livealone, or live a single family unit○ The need for youth to work to supplement the high cost of rentscame up substantiallyamong our conversations regarding multi-family households. Most of the youth supporting theirfamilies were youth under the age of 25. In order to meet the costs of rising rent, many of theseyouth and their families expressed thetragic tradeoffof prioritizing work over their own personaldevelopment, like completing their school or continuing their education. ● Being Afraid to Get Taxed But Then Showing Compassion for their Neighbors○ A small but significant narrative emerged from our deep canvass conversations with Latinovoters.While initially mentioning hesitationto support the rental assistance fund on the groundsof being “taxed” for such a fund,voters expressedcompassion and support for the programafter we shared that 80% of the residents in District 4 are renters and that the City couldpossibly reallocate existing funds, to address the issue of“housing insecurity.”○ These narratives were not attributed to any particular group, rather were found generallythroughout our canvass, even among the renter population. Renters, while initially concernedabout “being taxed” were moved by our deep canvass conversations when we contextualizedthe demographics of District 4 and the City’s ability to reallocate existing funds to meet thecommunity’s needs.
4. Closing:
In summary, in our first campaign we have been able to identify“housing insecurity”as the top issueLatinosare facing in the City of Costa Mesa. In our second campaign, the Latino community overwhelmingly showedsupport for the City to do more to implementstrongermitigation effortsto meet the rising rent they arefacing.All three funds proposed fared well with the voters as an initial step the City can take towards addressing theirneeds. The voters recognized the limitations of the funds and wanted to highlight the City’s role in doing morebeyond a rental assistance fund, a youth fund and a legal defense fund to meet their needs.
In regards to the City of Costa Mesa’s budget passing process, there are important issues that shouldn’t gowithout mentioning.- This year, the City of Costa Mesa failed to have a comprehensive list of all the budget meetings andstudy sessions regarding the budget. While the City did provide a skeleton of the meetings, It became amoving target.- Additionally, the City’s presentations in all budget meetings, up until June 7th, have only focused oncapital improvement projects and infrastructure, largely leaving out conversations for social programslike rental assistance, youth programs and community services until June 7th. 12 - The City’s budget passing has made it difficult for community organizations like ours who are largelyworking to help increase civic engagement opportunities for residents. The difficulty arose when tryingto advertise both the importance of voting and also providing input in the city budgeting process. Whilethere are two important events happening on June 7th, 2022, our organization has chosen to largelyfocus on reminding voters of the primary election on June 7th, however we are also engaging a smallerpool of community members about the importance of providing community input in the budget passingprocess as well. Our organization can not stress it enough that the City should have gatheredcommunity input regarding “social programs” prior to June 7th so as to not impede the civicengagement opportunities (like voting) for Costa Mesa residents.- Overall, voters expressed a lack of understanding of the City’s budget passing process and coupledwith the City’s lack of a comprehensive outreach & civic engagement strategy has largely left outparticipation and input from the City’s Latino community.
Lastly, our third campaign this year encompasses outreaching to voters in Costa Mesa to educate them on theimportance of voting in the upcoming Primary Election on June 7th. These “get out the vote efforts” build on therelationships we have been developing with the Latino community since the beginning of the year. We alsoanticipate additional campaigns and leadership development opportunities leading up to the general electionlater this year where we will continue base-building with the communities in the City of Costa Mesa. 13 Resumen de ResultadosConversaciones Profundas con los votantes Latinos de Costa Mesa 1 Agradecimientos
Equipo de Recolección de DatosTanya ValQuyen GenesisPriscila AndreaVictor ValladaresEscritores y EditoresRoberto HerreraGerardo LopezGráficas y Diseño OswaldoFarias Acerca de Resilience Orange CountyResilience Orange County es una organización que trabaja para fortalecer el liderazgo de lascomunidades de color para trabajar hacia la transformación de la comunidad. Trabajamospara informar e inspirar a las comunidades de color a prosperar y construir un futuro justo.Para obtener más información, visite: www.resilienceoc.org/. 2 Tabla de Contenido
Parte 1 Introducción 4Parte 2 Campañas 5Parte 3 Narrativos 7Parte 4 Fin 13 3 1. Introducción
Resilience OC es una organización de justicia social, fundada con la idea de que las comunidades puedenabogar por sí mismas para imaginar un futuro mejor. Nuestro trabajo comenzó en Santa Ana, sin embargo,después de una década de abogacía en esa ciudad, identificamos otras áreas en las ciudades cercanas quemerecían nuestro apoyo con la intencion de invertir y mejorar las comunidades de color. Costa Mesa fueidentificada como una de las comunidades que nos gustaría apoyar por parte de nuestra organización paraanimar a las comunidades de color a imaginar y construir un futuro mejor para ellos, sus familias y susvecinos.
Nuestra decisión de seguir adelante en Costa Mesa fue basada en la necesidad de invertir más recursos parala población Latina de la Ciudad. La imagen a continuación fue fundamental en el desarrollo de la decisiónpara realizar y comenzar nuestro trabajo en Costa Mesa.
Todos nuestros programas de estudios participativos son esfuerzos (501c3) y funcionan para profundizarnuestra relación con las comunidades de color. Desde el principio del año, hemos desarrollado tres campañasen Costa Mesa. En nuestras dos últimas campañas, hemos estado en colaboración con OCCET. La Mesa deParticipación Cívica del Condado de Orange (OCCET) es una mesa regional, no afiliada con ningún partidopolítico, dedicada a involucrar a los votantes de la region durante todo el año.
Esta alianza progresista se enfoca en los problemas afectando a las comunidades de color, incluyendo labatalla por la justicia laboral y ambiental. El trabajo de OCCET incluye la construcción de una transformaciónprogresiva de nuestra región para que todos sean tratados con equidad y justicia.
Varias organizaciones en el Condado de Orange forman la mesa de OCCET. Estas organizaciones trabajan entemas de justicia racial, económica y del apoyo de inmigrantes. A través de esta asociación innovadora, 4 OCCET se compromete a aumentar la calidad, la escala y la eficacia de la participación cívica en lascomunidades de color y entre las poblaciones de bajos ingresos del Condado de Orange.
2. Campañas:
Cronología:Entre el 3 de febrero de 2022 y el 9 demarzo de 2022, nuestraprimera campañade ResilienceOCse comunicó con 1215 votantes a través de un bancotelefónico y campañas de puerta a puerta.
Nuestra cantidad de contacto con los residentes inicialmente fue lenta, pero poco a poco mejoró. Al finalresultó que nuestros esfuerzos iniciales por teléfono fueron cruciales para construir las relaciones quepermitirían que nuestros esfuerzos de puerta a puerta fueran más efectivos a medida que avanzaba lacampaña.
Estas primeras conversaciones tenían como objetivo escuchar directamente de los votantes sobre lassiguientes tres preguntas:(1) ¿Qué tan familiarizado está con el proceso de aprobación del presupuesto de laciudad de Costa Mesa? (2) ¿Cuáles son los 3 principales problemas que le afectan a usted y a sus seresqueridos en Costa Mesa? (3) ¿Qué tan importante es para la ciudad apoyar y conectarse con la comunidadinmigrante en Costa Mesa? El 93,3 % de los votantescon los que hablamos compartieronqueno estaban familiarizados con elproceso de aprobación del presupuesto. De acuerdocon las respuestas que recolectamos, la“inseguridad de la vivienda”fue, por mucho, el problemamás común que enfrentaron los residentes deCosta Mesa. Los participantes también compartieronbastante apoyoa favor de que la Ciudad de CostaMesa haga más para apoyar yconectarse con sus vecinosinmigrantes.
Datos Sobre la Familiaridad con el Presupuesto● 1215 Votantes en Total○ 1134 NO (93.3%)○ 81 YES (6.6%) 5 Datos Sobre la Pregunta de Inmigración● Votantes en Total: 1,128○ 1 Super Opuesto [43] - (3.8%)○ 2 Inclinarse a Oponer [23] - (2%)○ 3 Neutral [121] - (10.7%)○ 4 Inclinarse a Apoyar [198] - (17.5%)○ 5 - Súper Apoyo [743] - (65.8%) Problema Principal - Inseguridad de la Vivienda
Nuestros datos muestran que la “inseguridad devivienda” es el problema más común que enfrenta lacomunidad Latina en Costa Mesa. Un votantecompartió que votaría para apoyar a sus vecinosporque sabe que muchos de ellos están siendodesplazados. El votante compartió que quiereasegurarse de que su comunidad permanezcaintacta. 6 Nuestra segunda campañaen Costa Mesa se desarrollódel 21 de marzo de 2022 hasta el 24 de abril de2022, donde volvimos con los mismos votantes del inicio de año. Volver a visitar a los mismos miembros de lacomunidad resultó en211 conversaciones en persona,lo que representó alrededor del 17 % de laspersonas contactadas en nuestros esfuerzos iniciales en Febrero. En esta segunda campaña hablamos conlos votantes y les ofrecimos posibles soluciones a los problemas que se identificaron anteriormente. Parte delas soluciones incluían un fondo de asistencia de renta, un fondo para programas para jóvenes y un fondo dedefensa legal de inmigración. Les preguntamos por su familiaridad con los tres fondos, oímos sus opinionessobre los fondos y últimamente cerramos con una pregunta directa: si apoyarían los programas mencionados.Los tres fondos fueron apoyados en gran medida por los votantes Latinos de Costa Mesa.
Fondo de Asistencia de Renta Fondo para Programas deJóvenes Fondo de Defensa Legal paraInmigrantes
Les preguntamos lo siguiente:¿Qué tan familiarizado está usted[el votante] con un fondo deasistencia de renta? Luego compartimos la siguienteInformación sobre el Distrito 4● Los datos de la Ciudadmuestran que el 80% de lapoblación en el Distrito 4son inquilinos. La mayoríano es dueño de su casa ypaga renta cada mes.● El Distrito 4 también tieneuna de las cifras más altasde viviendas multifamiliares,lo que significa que hay másde una familia viviendo encada hogar.
Les preguntamos lo siguiente:¿Qué tan familiarizado está usted[el votante] con un fondo parajóvenes? Luego compartimos la siguienteinformación sobre el Distrito 4● El Distrito 4 tiene lapoblación juvenil másgrande de la Ciudad. El32% de la población tiene18 años o menos.
Les preguntamos lo siguiente:¿Qué tan familiarizado está usted [elvotante] con un fondo de defensa legalpara inmigrantes? Luego compartimos la siguienteinformación sobre el Distrito 4● El Distrito 4 tiene la poblacióninmigrante más alta. El 39% delos residentes del distrito soninmigrantes. Compare esto conel Distrito 6, cuya poblacióninmigrante representa el 11% dela población total del distrito.
La Ciudad clasificó a residentes inmigrantes endos categorías; “naturalizado” e “inmigrante”. Laciudad de Costa Mesa define "inmigrante" comopersonas nacidas en el extranjero, incluyendoresidentes permanentes legales, beneficiarios deDACA, solicitantes de asilo, titulares de visastemporales y miembros indocumentados de lacomunidad. Este punto de datos se puedeencontrar en elsitio webde redistribución dedistritos de la Ciudad de Costa Mesa. Lainformación se encuentra en el Mapa deRedistritación 115. 7 Nuestro seguimiento incluyó lassiguientes preguntas
● ¿Usted o sus vecinos hanvisto un aumento en susrentas en los últimos años?En caso que sí, ¿quéimpacto ha tenido?● ¿Tener una renta más altahace que le resulte cada vezmás difícil pagar sus otrasfacturas? ¿Qué gastos hastenido que recortar parapoder completar la renta afin de mes?● Si la Ciudad ofreciera unprograma piloto deasistencia de renta, ¿leinteresaría ser parte delprograma? Nuestro seguimiento incluyó lassiguientes preguntas
● ¿Conoces a algún jovenque creas que se beneficieen tener la oportunidad departicipar en actividadespositivas de desarrollojuvenil?● Si la ciudad aprobara unprograma para jóvenes,¿hay algún programa quele interesaría ver?● ¿Cree que estosprogramas beneficiarían alos jóvenes y su bienestarsocial y emocional? Nuestro seguimiento incluyó lassiguientes preguntas:
● ¿Cree que las deportacionesimpactan a las comunidades deCosta Mesa? Si es así, ¿de quémanera?● ¿Conoce personalmente aalguien que pueda identificarsecomo inmigrante?● ¿Cree que un fondo de defensalegal beneficiaría a la comunidadLatina? Si el votante expresó su falta devoluntad para apoyar el fondodebido al posible aumento de losimpuestos que pagaría. . .
Les explicamos [al votante] que laciudad no recaudaría másimpuestos sino que reasignaríafondos del presupuesto de laCiudad.
Si el votante expresó su falta devoluntad para apoyar el fondodebido al posible aumento delos impuestos que pagaría. . .
Les explicamos [al votante] que laciudad no recaudaría másimpuestos sino que reasignaríafondos del presupuesto de laCiudad.
Si el votante expresó su falta devoluntad para apoyar el fondo debidoal posible aumento de los impuestosque pagaría. . .
Les explicamos [al votante] que laciudad no recaudaría más impuestossino que reasignaría fondos delpresupuesto de la Ciudad.
Cerramos con una solicituddirecta de apoyo.● ¿Usted [el votante] apoyaríael fondo? Cerramos con una solicituddirecta de apoyo.● ¿Usted [el votante]apoyaría el fondo? Cerramos con una solicitud directade apoyo.● ¿Usted [el votante] apoyaría elfondo? 8 Después de revisar los tres fondos con el votante,les pedimos que priorizaran solo uno. Esta fue unapregunta difícil ya que los tres fondos fueron bien recibidos por los votantes porque cada uno cubrió una partede sus necesidades. Su decisión de seleccionar un fondo sobre los demás no significó que no apoyaran aninguno de los otros fondos. De hecho, en muchos casos los votantes darían prioridad a los tres si tuvieran laoportunidad.
Total de Conversaciones en Persona de Nuestra Segunda Campaña: 211 conversaciones● (131) o62%de los votantes Latinos priorizaron unFondo de Asistencia de Renta● (45) o21%de los votantes Latinos priorizaron unFondo para Programas para Jóvenes● (35) o17%de los votantes Latinos priorizaron unFondo de Defensa Legal
3. Narrativos:Los siguientes ejemplos ilustran las narrativas y las historias que los votantes compartieron con nosotros queen sí, resaltan la necesidad de que Costa Mesa haga más para enfrentar las diferentes crisis que enfrentanlos residentes. Estas crisis incluyen el estrés financiero impuesto por el aumento de rentas, la falta deoportunidades de desarrollo académico y extracurricular para los jóvenes, así como las conexiones con losesfuerzos locales de participación cívica, la falta de infraestructura legal y apoyo financiero para ayudar a lacomunidad inmigrante.
La comunidad Latina en Costa Mesa enfatizó los impactos inmediatos y residuales de COVID. Expresaroncómo la pandemia aún continúa afectando casi todos los aspectos de sus vidas, incluida su salud mental yfísica, así como su estabilidad financiera. Los votantes compartieron que la crisis de COVID no ha terminado yque su necesidad de apoyo solo ha aumentado desde entonces.
Narrativas de las Conversaciones Acerca de el Fondo de Programas para Jóvenes● Hubo gran apoyo hacia los programas para asegurar un futuro brillante para la juventud deCosta Mesa:los votantes Latinos compartieron queapoyarían a el fondo juvenil para apoyar a lajuventud de Costa Mesa y compartieron que un motivo principal para su decisión de apoyar un fondopara jóvenes se basó en la necesidad de que sus hijos tengan éxito en la vida como una forma deasegurar el futuro de su familia.● Variedad en los programas para satisfacer las necesidades de la comunidad:los votantes Latinosexpresaron la necesidad de que los programas para jóvenes sean amplios y diversospara satisfacerlas varias necesidades de los jóvenes de todas edades.○ Edad de beneficiarios de los programas para jóvenes■ Niños pequeños menores de 6 años■ Jóvenes de 6 a 12 años■ Adolecentes de 18 años o menos■ Adultos menores de 25 años○ Diversidad en los programas recreativos para los jóvenes 9 ■ Programas de cuidado infantil para apoyar la capacidad de los miembros de lacomunidad para trabajar y mantener a su familia.■ Programas después de la escuelapara dar tiempo quelos padres puedan regresar acasa del trabajo.■ Apoyo educativopara los jóvenes, ya sea ayuda conlas tareas asignadas o tutoría.■ Programas recreativos, sociales y deportivosque noestán relacionados con la escuelao la tutoría.■ Servicios y recursos de salud mental para abordarel aumento del estrés así como otrasestrategias para la salud y bienestar mental. 10 Narrativas Acerca del Fondo de Defensa Legal● Hubo gran apoyo para el programa de asistencia legal para inmigrantes en Costa Mesa.○ Los votantes Latinos compartieron que apoyaban en gran medida el fondo de defensa legalpara apoyar a la comunidad inmigrante en Costa Mesa. Algunos de los votantes expresaron sudisgusto por las deportaciones y la separación familiar, ya que compartieron sentir empatía porlas dificultades que conlleva criar una familia por su cuenta.○ Otros votantes, aunque no fueran directamente afectados, mostraron compasión y empatía yentendieron la importancia que un fondo de defensa legal puede tener para sus familias,vecinos y seres queridos.○ En referencia al fondo, los votantes compartieron que la Ciudad de Costa Mesa debería hacermás para brindar apoyo financiero o asistencia con un abogado de inmigración y otrosesfuerzos que harían que la Ciudad de Costa Mesa apoyara a sus residentes indocumentados. ● Infraestructura en Costa Mesa para apoyar a la comunidad inmigrante en Costa Mesa○ Una narrativa que los votantes expresaron con frecuencia sería que quisieran que la Ciudad deCosta Mesa ayudará a centralizar los servicios de apoyo legal en Costa Mesa para facilitar quela comunidad inmigrante busque servicios legales.○ Los votantes compartieron que lleva mucho tiempo llegar a Santa Ana, donde se encuentran lamayoría de los proveedores de servicios legales sin fines de lucro. Las dificultades vienen parala comunidad inmigrante ya que tienen que ajustar sus horas de trabajo para tener en cuentacualquier tiempo de viaje en transporte público o falta de disponibilidad de citas. ● Familias de estatus mixto○ Basado en conversaciones profundas con los votantes Latinos, hubo varias formas en queestán conectados o en relación con la comunidad inmigrante en Costa Mesa. Los votantescompartieron directamente tener familiares indocumentados o conocer a alguien en CostaMesa que lo sea, incluidos miembros de su familia extendida, ancianos, sus amigos y vecinos.Otros expresaron conocer explícitamente a jóvenes en Costa Mesa que son indocumentados,mientras que algunos dijeron que sus padres son indocumentados. ● Comprendiendo el debido al proceso legal○ Al principio, un votante compartió sus dudas para apoyar un fondo de defensa legal porquetenía la impresión de que todos ya tienen derecho a un abogado, independientemente de suestatus legal. Después de compartir que algunos derechos no están garantizados en la corte deinmigración y la necesidad de un abogado de inmigración es alta, incluso para los residentes deCosta Mesa, este votante se inclinó a apoyar el fondo.○ Otro votante estaba confundido y pensó que la comunidad inmigrante tendría que pagar másimpuestos para beneficiarse del fondo. Cuando le explicamos que no afectaría la cantidad deimpuestos que pagarían, sino que la Ciudad reasignaría los fondos existentes que ya tiene, elvotante expresó un fuerte apoyo al fondo. 11 Narrativas Acerca de el Fondo de Asistencia de Renta● Gran apoyo para un fondo de asistencia de renta○ En muchas de nuestras conversaciones profundas, los votantes latinos apoyaron en granmedida la idea de que la Ciudad debería desarrollar un fondo de asistencia de alquiler parasatisfacer las necesidades de los residentes que siguen aumentando y los cambios en CostaMesa. En muchas de estas conversaciones, se hicieron muchas menciones en referencia aprotecciones más fuertes y esfuerzos de mitigación para abordar el problema de la "inseguridadde la vivienda". Algunos votantes hicieron referencia a los esfuerzos que la Ciudad de SantaAna ha aprobado para aliviar parte del estrés financiero y de vivienda que enfrentan losinquilinos, incluida la asistencia de alquiler y el control de los aumentos de renta.● Aumentación de Renta -Los votantes Latinos mencionaronrepetidamente el "aumento de renta"ennuestras conversaciones con ellos. A continuación se presentan diversas narrativas que compartieroncon nosotros.○ Renta Pagada por Mes■ Mientras capturamos lo que los votantes estaban dispuestos a compartir, algunoscompartieron el pago de $2100 por un apartamento de 1 habitación. Sin embargo,muchos residentes compartieron aumentos anuales de alquiler de $100 o $110 enpromedio, y un residente mencionó que tenía que soportar dos aumentos de alquiler enun año. Algunos residentes mencionaron que si bien la renta aumentaría, lascondiciones de su casa o departamento no lo harían.■ La frase de“Ingreso fijo”surgió continuamente ennuestras conversaciones con lacomunidad Latina en Costa Mesa. Los residentes expresaron su temor por laincapacidad de pagar los aumentos de renta cuando incluyen todos sus otros gastos.Estos residentes eran en su mayoría de la tercera edad y otros mencionaron vivir en laSección 8.○ Esfuerzos de Mitigación como el Control de Renta■ El “control de renta” también se mencionó varias veces en nuestras conversaciones conlos votantes Latinos.■ Los votantes entendían el "control de renta" comoun esfuerzo de mitigaciónparaabordar el aumento de renta, expresaron su apoyo y algunos incluso tenían familias enciudades como Santa Ana, donde han promulgado tales protecciones para losinquilinos.■ Algunos votantes también hablaron con franqueza sobre la “gentrificación” y su impactoen el aumento de la renta y el desplazamiento de la comunidad.○ Estrés Financiero■ Varias veces en nuestras conversaciones, los votantes expresaron unprofundo estrésfinancieropor el aumento de la renta. De manera similar,los votantes expresaron un"sentido de urgencia" donde tales programas para mitigar el aumento de la renta "nopueden esperar hasta mañana". Envueltos en dudas, los residentes compartieron queestos programas no llegarían lo suficientemente pronto para satisfacer sus necesidades.Otros compartieron una sensación de “desplazamiento,” una sensación de estarsaliendo, al borde del desalojo o sintiéndose expulsados de la ciudad. Un residentecompartió que ya planeaba irse de la ciudad porque ya no puede pagar el aumento derenta. 12 ● Varias familias que viven juntas para pagar una renta○ El segundo tema más documentado que surgió de nuestras conversaciones profundas con losvotantes latinos de Costa Mesa fue su necesidad de vivir juntos para pagar una sola renta(hogares multifamiliares). Si bien algunos no revelaron con quién viven en particular, otros sí lohicieron, compartiendo vivir con miembros de la familia extendida o con compañeros de cuarto.Algunos expresaron su incapacidad para pagar los aumentos de renta, la incapacidad para vivirsolos o vivir en una sola unidad familiar.○ La necesidad de que los jóvenes trabajen para complementar el alto costo de las rentassurgió varias veces en nuestras conversaciones sobre los hogares multifamiliares. La mayoríade los jóvenes que mantienen a sus familias eran jóvenes menores de 25 años. Para cubrir loscostos del aumento de la renta, muchos de estos jóvenes y sus familias expresaronelintercambio trágicode priorizar el trabajo sobresu propio desarrollo personal, como terminar laescuela o continuar con su educación. ● Tener miedo de pagar más impuestos pero luego mostrar compasión por sus vecinos○ Una narrativa pequeña pero significativa estuvo presente en nuestras conversaciones con losvotantes Latinos. El votante estaba inicialmente dudosos sobre el fondo de asistencia de rentay dio argumentos de no querer pagar más impuestos por dicho fondo. Después de compartirque el 80 % de la población de los residentes del Distrito 4 son inquilinos y que la Ciudadposiblemente podría reasignar los fondos existentes,los votantes expresaron compasión yapoyaron el programapara atender el tema de la“inseguridadde vivienda.”Estas narrativasque se compartieron con nosotros no se atribuyeron a ningún grupo en particular, sino que seencontraron en general a lo largo de nuestras conversaciones con los votantes, incluso entre lapoblación de inquilinos. Este grupo, aunque inicialmente estaban preocupados por "tener quepagar más impuestos," sintieron conmovidos por nuestras conversaciones cuandocontextualizamos la demografía del Distrito 4 y la capacidad de la Ciudad para reasignar losfondos existentes para satisfacer las necesidades de la comunidad.
4. Fin:
En resumen, en nuestra primera campaña hemos podido identificar la“inseguridad de la vivienda”comoelproblema principal que enfrentan los Latinos en la Ciudad de Costa Mesa. En nuestra segunda campaña, lacomunidad Latina expresó que la Ciudad debe hacer más para implementaresfuerzos de mitigaciónparadirigir el aumento de la renta que están enfrentando los residentes. A los tres fondos propuestos les fue biencon los votantes como un paso inicial que la Ciudad puede tomar para abordar sus necesidades. Los votantesreconocieron las limitaciones de los fondos y querían resaltar que la Ciudad debería hacer más que soloproveer un fondo de asistencia de renta, un fondo para jóvenes y un fondo de defensa legal.
Con respecto al proceso de aprobación del presupuesto de la ciudad de Costa Mesa, hay asuntos importantesque no deben ir sin mencionarse. 13 - Este año, la Ciudad de Costa Mesa no pudo proveer una lista completa de todas las sesiones deestudio sobre el presupuesto. Mientras la ciudad asignó un calendario de las reuniones, el documentose convirtió en un objetivo móvil sin consistencia.- Además, las presentaciones de la Ciudad en todas las reuniones presupuestarias, antes del 7 de junio,solo se han centrado en proyectos de capital e infraestructura, dejando de lado en gran medida lasconversaciones sobre programas sociales como la asistencia de renta, programas para jóvenes yservicios comunitarios se han guardado hasta el 7 de junio.- La aprobación del presupuesto de la Ciudad ha dificultado las cosas para organizaciones comunitariascomo la nuestra, que trabajan en gran medida para ayudar a aumentar las oportunidades departicipación cívica para los residentes. La dificultad surgió cuando se trataba de publicitar tanto lainformación en el proceso presupuestario de la ciudad así como la importancia de votar ese mismo día.Aunque va a ver dos eventos importantes que se llevarán a cabo el 7 de junio de 2022, nuestraorganización ha optado en enfocarse en gran medida a recordar a los votantes sobre las eleccionesprimarias del 7 de junio. Sin embargo, también estamos involucrando a un grupo más pequeño demiembros de la comunidad sobre la importancia de brindar aportes comunitarios en el proceso deaprobación del presupuesto. Nuestra organización no puede enfatizar lo suficiente que la Ciudaddebería haber recopilado comentarios de la comunidad con respecto a los "programas sociales" antesdel 7 de junio para no impedir las oportunidades de participación cívica (como votando) para losresidentes de Costa Mesa.- En general, los votantes expresaron una falta de comprensión del proceso de aprobación delpresupuesto de la Ciudad y, junto con la falta de una estrategia integral de divulgación y compromisocívico de la Ciudad, ha dejado de lado en gran medida la participación y los aportes de la comunidadlatina.
Por último, nuestra tercera campaña de este año intenta alentar y educar a los votantes sobre la importanciade votar en las próximas elecciones primarias del 7 de junio.
Estos “esfuerzos para sacar el voto” se basan en las relaciones que hemos estado desarrollando con lacomunidad Latina de Costa Mesa desde principios de año. También anticipamos campañas adicionales yoportunidades de desarrollo de liderazgo antes de las elecciones generales de este año, dondecontinuaremos construyendo relaciones con las comunidades de la Ciudad de Costa Mesa. 14 1
BENNETT, STACY
From: [email protected]
Sent: Tuesday, June 7, 2022 8:43 AM
To: CITY CLERK
Subject: HR 8 BIPARTISAN BACKGROUND CHECKS ACT 2021
HI COSTA MESA CITY COUNCIL,
I just wanted to express my opposition to this resolution it severely restricts the rights of legal gun owners. Please oppose this resolution. Thank you
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Report any suspicious activities to the Information Technology Department.
1 BENNETT, STACY
From: Shane Fox <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 7, 2022 9:03 AM
To: Shane Fox
Subject: Opposition to HR 8 Letter of Support
To Whom This May Concern,
I am writing to you to voice my opinion against the letter of support for H.R. 8 by the city of Costa Mesa. I am a gun owner and supporter of the 2nd amendment, but I also believe things need to change in our country regarding gun violence. That being said, H.R. 8 is not the solution. I do not feel the city of Costa messa should issue this letter as The letter states it is on behalf of the City of Costa Mesa. However, there is little to no opportunity to have input from the community on this matter as the letter was only provided Friday to the council members. This also gives the council members very little time to review the bill and better understand what they are being asked to support.
Best Regards,
A Citizen of Costa Mesa
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Report any suspicious activities to the Information Technology Department.
1 BENNETT, STACY
From: ronald chee <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 7, 2022 9:06 AM
To: CITY CLERK
Subject: HR8
As a citizen of Costa Mesa, I oppose the passing of HR8, as it infringes on Law abiding Gun owner Rights to not only acquire a firearm but to sell or trade with another Law abiding Gun owner. I urge the City Council to oppose HR8. Guns don’t murder, crazy people do!!
Sent from my iPhone
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Report any suspicious activities to the Information Technology Department.
1 BENNETT, STACY
From: H Millard <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 7, 2022 9:16 AM
To: CITY CLERK
Subject: OPPOSITION TO CITY COUNCIL LETTER ON H.R.8
As a former combat Marine, and resident of Costa Mesa, I am opposed to the letter the City Council may send in support of H.R. 8--the Bipartisan Background Checks Act of 2021.
The act sounds good and reasonable until you really look at it and then you see that it goes too far.
The City Council letter is an example of unnecessary PC virtue signaling and, to repeat, supports an act that simply goes too far in that, for example, it also bars simply passing on a firearm to a family member without going though an expensive, intrusive, and lengthy background check by a licensed firearm dealer.
It will also open the door to more attacks on the 2nd Amendment. The cliche of a camel sticking its nose under the tent comes to mind with this misguided act.
Respectfully,
Martin Millard
--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Report any suspicious activities to the Information Technology Department.
1 BENNETT, STACY
From: david hillberg <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 7, 2022 9:26 AM
To: CITY CLERK
Cc: Democratic Party of Orange County; [email protected] Subject: HR 8 and the 2nd amendment
Dear Costa Mesa Governance
I am not in favor of cities counties states or our federal government in the infringement of our constitution, bill of rights, or
liberties of free persons in the lawful possession and transfer of firearms by persons who are not criminals, parolees
and persons adjudicated by the courts to be of unsound character or minds, over the years I have noticed that the narrative
and agenda of the vocal few have been steering the state and nation to a conclusion contrary of out God given right of the
preservation of our lives, way of life, and the choice of how we live our lives, The history and actions of our state and federal
government demonstrate the need for self-protection more than ever, with the decline of prosecutions, arrests, convictions,
incarcerations, and rehabilitation the policies new laws and doctrines that made DA's office and law enforcement ineffective
in the performance of their task. I warn the city council the path they follow is of good intent that will lead to our hell,
Those who are currently in power seek absolute power by any means to include the incremental loss of our liberties for
the disguise of safety. It ins not the duty of governance to infringe on the citizen , it is the responsibility of governance
to make wards of the state those who are not intent of the good of society, criminal elements, the physically and mentally
unable, and infrastructure, Leave the well-intended citizens alone they are not the problem, this undeclared silent quiet
violent proxy war upon the citizens continues. Do not be the ally of a corrupted governance be an ally to the good citizens.
2 you have been warned, whatever color or flavor of Kool-Aid you all been drinking, STOP IT! David Hillberg
candidate for lieutenant Governor
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Report any suspicious activities to the Information Technology Department.
1 BENNETT, STACY
From: Durwin Coustaut <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 7, 2022 9:31 AM
To: CITY CLERK
Subject: H. R. Bipartisan Background Checks Act of 2021 Bill represents gun control measures that only hurts freedoms of law-abiding citizens & does nothing to reduce "CRIMINAL" gun violence. Also; gives the council members little time to review bill & better understand what they are being asked to support. Nothing productive.
Thank you. Law-biding citizen;
D. Coustaut
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Report any suspicious activities to the Information Technology Department.
1 BENNETT, STACY
From: [email protected]
Sent: Tuesday, June 7, 2022 9:58 AM
To: CITY CLERK; [email protected]
Subject: Letter in Support of H. R. 8
I am very disappointed to see that the Council feels is it is in the interest of the people you represent and all American's to issue this letter. It is clearly an emotional act that will have virtually no affect on the real issue. By trying to restrict our freedoms/rights you are enforcing a policy denies law abiding citizens of a Constitutional right, period.
Please reconsider this senseless action.
Erick Erickson
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Report any suspicious activities to the Information Technology Department.
1 BENNETT, STACY
From: David Evenson <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 7, 2022 10:45 AM
To: CITY CLERK
Subject: H.R. 6
Hello,
I’m contacting you in regards to H.R. 6. I strongly urge the members of this city’s council not to adopt this resolution.
Little time has been given to members to consider the ramifications of this bill to local law abiding citizens and responsible gun owners. This bill would not have prevented any of the recent tragedies that have occurred. It will however, only hinder Second Amendment Rights to responsible law-abiding citizens. Thank you for your time.
Dave Evenson
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Report any suspicious activities to the Information Technology Department.
1 BENNETT, STACY
From: Patrick Caswell <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 7, 2022 11:18 AM
To: CITY CLERK
Subject: Opposition to letter of support
I am writing to you to express my opposition to any support for HR 8.
I am in opposition to any law that forces me to relinquish control of or possession of my personal property in order to conduct a legal transfer of said property.
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Report any suspicious activities to the Information Technology Department.
1 BENNETT, STACY
From: Heather Hawke <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 7, 2022 11:57 AM
To: CITY CLERK
Subject: City Council Meeting Tonight - Orange County Gun Owners PAC Response to Agenda Resolution for Letter to Support HR8
Attachments: OCGO Costa Mesa HR 8 Response 06072022.pdf Good Afternoon,
Please see attached letter from the Orange County Gun Owners PAC to be printed and shared with the members of the Costa Mesa City Council in regards the Resolution to send a letter of support to the United States House of Representatives for H.R. 8. This Resolution is on the Agenda for this evening's City Council meeting.
Please let me know if you have any questions or need any additional information from us.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Heather Hawke
Executive Director
Orange County Gun Owners PAC
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Report any suspicious activities to the Information Technology Department.
June 7, 2022
Costa Mesa City Council
77 Fair Drive
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Costa Mesa City Council Members,
The Orange County Gun Owners PAC was made aware of the Resolution added to you City Council Meeting agenda for this evening that would provide approval for the issue of a letter to the United States House of Representatives in support of Resolution 8 (H.R. 8), the Bipartisan Background Checks Act of 2021.
The letter states it is on behalf of the City of Costa Mesa, however, there is little to no opportunity to have input from the community on this matter as the letter was only provided Friday to the council members. This also gives the council members very little time to review the bill and better understand what they are being asked to support.
H.R. 8, the Bipartisan Background Checks Act of 2021, establishes new background check requirements for firearm transfers between private parties (i.e., unlicensed individuals). Specifically, it prohibits a firearm transfer between private parties unless a licensed gun dealer, manufacturer, or importer first takes possession of the firearm to conduct a background check. This includes "transferring" as in handing your firearm to a family member or letting someone borrow your firearm.
H.R. 8’s background check requirement on firearm transfers criminalizes the actions of honest, law-abiding citizens, including the following scenarios* :
● Tim is struggling with suicidal thoughts. He asks a close friend to safekeep his guns while he seeks help. Under H.R. 8, Tim potentially faces up to one year in prison and/or a $100,000 fine.
● Shannon is a victim of violent domestic abuse. Her ex-husband and abuser is being released from prison and Shannon fears for her life. Shannon’s neighbor, Scott, lends her a firearm for self-defense. Under H.R. 8, Scott potentially faces up to one year in prison and/or a $100,000 fine.
1 ● Joe and Bill have been hunting together for 40 years. This year, Joe is sick and can’t make the trip, but Bill asks if he can borrow Joe’s deer rifle. Joe lends the rifle to Bill the weekend before the trip, but Bill can’t return it immediately once the trip is over. Under H.R. 8, Joe potentially faces up to one year in prison and/or a $100,000 fine. ● Ted’s uncle wants to go to the shooting range. Ted knows he’s allowed to transfer a firearm to an aunt or uncle, so he agrees to lend him his rifle. When Ted’s cousin shows up at the door on his way to meet Ted’s uncle at the shooting range, Ted gives him the rifle. Under H.R. 8, while aunts and uncles are exempted from transfer restrictions, cousins arbitrarily are not, and Ted now potentially faces up to one year in prison and/or a $100,000 fine.
This bill represents gun control measures that encroach on the freedoms of law-abiding citizens under the United States Constitution and do little to reduce gun violence. It would also require Universal Background Checks and a National Gun Registry to enforce such requirements which a majority of US citizens strongly oppose. It would not have prevented any of the recent tragedies that have occurred, only hinder law-abiding citizens' Second Amendment Rights. For these reasons, Orange County Gun Owners PAC and it's members oppose support of H.R. 8 and would request the council consider to vote against sending the letter to the United States House of Representatives.
Thank you for your time and consideration on this matter.
Sincerely,
Heather Hawke
Executive Director
Orange County Gun Owners PAC
[email protected]
*Scenarios referenced from First Congressional District of Louisiana House Representative's opposing arguments 2