Attachment No. 4 - PC Comment letters and City Attorney Response Letter dated January 17, 2023 to the Appellant

Jennifer J. Farrell
Direct Dial: (714) 338-1884
E-mail: [email protected]

January 17, 2023

VIA E-MAIL
Sheila M. Sannadan
Adams Broadwell Joseph & Cardozo
601 Gateway Boulevard, Ste. 1000 South San
Francisco, CA 94080 Email:
[email protected]

Re: City of Fontana’s Response to January 12, 2023 and January 4, 2023 Correspondence Re: Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Fontana Square Project (Master Case No. 20-083).

Dear: Ms. Sannadan,
This office represents the City of Fontana (“ City”) as its Assistant City Attorney . Our office is in receipt of your Janu ary 12, 2023 letter seeking an extension of the review period for the Mitigated Negative Declaration (“MND”) for the Fontana Square Project (Master Case No. 20-083) (“Extension Letter ”), your January 4, 2023 letter requesting access to documents (“Document Request Letter”), and your January 4, 2023 Public Records Act Request for “any and all records referring or related to the Fontana Square Project, Master Case No. 20 -083” (“CPRA Letter”), sent on behalf of your client Californians Allied for a Responsible Economy (“CARE CA”). Each of the aforementioned letters relates to the MND for the Fontana Square Project (Master Case No. 20-083) (“Project”).

Your Extension Letter requests that the City extend the public review and comment period on the MND for the Project because CARE CA has not been able to obtain and review certain documents cited in the MND. Your letter asserts that the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) requires the City to provide around 40 documents in response to your Document Request Letter which you describe as submitted “pursuant to CEQA,” specifically CEQA section 21092(b)(1) and CEQA Guidelines section 15072(g)(4), requesting “ immediate access to all documents referenced or relied upon;” in the MND.”
As more specifically set forth herein, the City respectfully declines your request to extend the public review and comment period for the Project, because the City has fully complied with its obligations pursuant to CEQA section 21092(b)(1) and CEQA Guidelines section 15072(g)(4).

CEQA section 21092(b)(1) includes public notice requirements for agencies preparing environmental impact reports or negative declarations. It provides, in relevant part “[t] he notice shall specify . . . the address where copies of the draft environmental impact report or negative declaration, and all documents referenced in the draft environmental impact report or negative

Sheila M. Sannadan
January 17, 2023

Page 2 ends

2905/035458-0011
18712265.9 a01/17/23

declaration, are available for review ….” (Pub. Res. Code, § 21092(b)(1) [ emphasis added ].) CEQA Guidelines section 15072(g)(4) clarifies that the notice shall specify “[t] he address where copies of the proposed negative declaration or mitigated declaration and all documents incorporated by reference in the proposed negative declaration or mitigat ed declaration will be available for public review. This location shall be readily accessible to the public during the lead agency's normal working hours.” (14 Cal. Code Regs., § 15072(g)(4) [emphasis added].) CEQA Guidelines section 15072(g)(4) was most recently amended effective 2018 to clarify that the term “referenced in the proposed negative declaration or mitigated declaration ” for the purposes of CEQA section 21092 and CEQA Guidelines section 15072(g)(4) means “ incorporated by reference” as described in CEQA Guidelines section 15150.1 In its comments on the amendment, the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research observed that “ if the requirement for the lead agency to make documents available for public inspection were to include all documents s imply referenced or cited in an EIR or negative declaration, the requirement would be burdensome, unnecessary and unreasonable on lead agencies .” These authorities clarify that CEQA requires that the City provide notice of the address where all documents incorporated by reference in the MND are available for public inspection.

The City’s public notice specified that the MND and all documents incorporated by reference in the MND are available for review at Fontana City Hall, 8353 Sierra Ave., Fontana, CA 92335. The City has therefore complied with its obligations pursuant to pursuant to CEQA section 21092(b)(1) and CEQA Guidelines section 15072(g)(4).

The City will continue responding to your requests for documents in your CPRA Letter in compliance with the California Public Records Act (Gov. Code, §§ 7920.000 et seq) (“CPRA”).

However, the City rejects the assertion in your CPRA Letter that CPRA section 6253 (recodified at Government Code Section 7922.525) entitles you to “immediate access” to the rec ords requested, and that the CPRA response timelines do not apply.

CPRA section 7922.525 provides in full:
(a) Public records are open to inspection at all times during the office hours of a state or local agency and every person has a right to inspect any public record, exempted as otherwise provided.

(b) Any reasonably segregable portion of a record shall be available for inspection by any person requesting the record after deletion of the portions that are exempted by law.

This section is part of the overall framework of the CPRA, but does not provide a separate right of access to the timelines for response. (See Gov. Code, § 7922.535.) CPRA Section 792.525 provides the general public right to inspect records, including a right to inspect records at the

1 Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, November 2017 Proposed Updates to the CEQA Guidelines [https://opr.ca.gov/docs/20171127_Comprehensive_CEQA_Guidelines_Package_Nov_2017.pdf].

Sheila M. Sannadan
January 17, 2023

Page 3 ends

2905/035458-0011
18712265.9 a01/17/23

business location of a local agency during business hours. This section does not provide an alternative avenue to circumvent the timeframes provided in the CPRA. ( See Bruce v. Gregory (1967) 65 Cal.2d 666, 676 [right to public records constrained by an “inherent reasonableness limitation … to protect the safety of the records against theft, mutilation or accidental damage, to prevent inspection from interfering with the orderly function of his office and its employees, and generally to avoid chaos in the record archives.”]; Rosenthal v. Hansen (1973) 34 Cal.App.3d 754, 761.)

For these reasons, the City respectfully declines your request to extend the public review and comment period for the Project.

Very truly yours,

RUTAN & TUCKER, LLP

Jennifer J. Farrell
Assistant City Attorney for the City of Fontana
JF:js

6452-005j
KEVIN T. CARMICHAEL
CHRISTINA M. CARO
THOMAS A. ENSLOW
KELILAH D. FEDERMAN
RICHARD M. FRANCO
ANDREW J. GRAF
TANYA A. GULESSERIAN
RACHAEL E. KOSS
AIDAN P. MARSHALL
TARA C. RENGIFO

Of Counsel
MARC D. JOSEPH
DANIEL L. CARDOZO

SO. SAN FRANCISCO OFFICE

601 GATEWAY BLVD., SUITE 1000
SO. SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94080
T E L : ( 6 5 0 ) 5 8 9 - 1 6 6 0
F A X : ( 6 5 0 ) 5 8 9 - 5 0 6 2

ADAMS BROADWELL JOSEPH & CARDOZO

A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION

A T T O RN E Y S A T L A W

5 2 0 C A P I T O L M A L L , S U I T E 3 5 0
S A C R A M E N T O , C A 9 5 8 1 4- 47 21
___________

T E L : ( 9 1 6 ) 4 4 4- 6 2 0 1
F A X : ( 9 1 6 ) 4 4 4- 6 2 0 9
k c a r m i c h a e l@ a d a m s b r o a d w e l l . c o m

printed on recycled paper

January 12, 2023

Via Email and U.S. Mail
Patty Nevins, Director
Planning Department
City of Fontana
8353 Sierra Avenue
Fontana, CA 92335
Email: [email protected]

Via Email Only
Salvador Quintanilla, Senior Planner
Email: [email protected]
Germaine McClellan Key, City Clerk
Office of the City Clerk
City of Fontana
8353 Sierra Avenue
Fontana, CA 92335
Email: [email protected]

Re: Request to Extend the Public Review and Comment Period for the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Continue the Planning Commission Hearing – Fontana Square Project (Master Case No. 20-083)

Dear Ms. Nevins, Ms. Key and Mr. Quintanilla:

On behalf of Californians Allied for a Responsible Economy (“CARE CA”) we respectfully request that the City of Fontana (“City”) extend the public review and comment period for the Mitigated Negative Declaration (“MND”) prepared for the Fontana Square Project, Master Case No. 20-083, (“Project”) proposed by Citrus Development, LLC (“Applicant”) ”), by at least 20 days due to the City’s failure to provide timely access to the supporting documents for the MND. This request is made pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, Pub. Resources Code (“PRC”) §§ 21000 et seq. (“CEQA”) Section 21092(b)(1), which requires that “all documents referenced in the draft environmental impact report or negative declaration” be available for review and “readily accessible” during the entire comment period.1

1 PRC §§ 21092(b)(1) (emphasis added); 14 Cal. Code Regs. (“CCR”) § 15072(g)(4).

January 12, 2023

Page 2 ends

6452-005j
Additionally, CARE CA requests that the City Planning Commission continue the hearing scheduled for January 17, 2023, to a later date in order for the Planning Commission to review and evaluate MND comments received by the City during the public comment period.

The Project consists of a multi-tenant commercial development composed of a banquet hall (2 stories, 38,907 SF), a dual branded Holiday Inn Express/Staybridge Suites hotel (5 stories, 121,094 SF), a convenience store/restaurant (5,000 SF), and an In-N-Out Burger (3,885 SF). The Project includes onsite improvements such as decorative landscaping, surface parking, a drive-through, security lighting and other associated improvements. The Project is located at 16014 S. Highland Avenue, Fontana, CA 92336 (APNs: 0228-301-01 through -08, 0228-310-20, -21, -22, -23, 0228-310-33 through -49, -51, and -52).

The MND was released for public comment on December 23, 2022. The public comment period currently ends on January 17, 2023.2 The Planning Commission’s decisional hearing on the Project is scheduled for January 17, 2023, during the CEQA comment period.

I. THE CITY FAILED TO RELEASE DOCUMENTS REFERENCED

IN THE MND

On January 4, 2023, we submitted a letter to the City pursuant to CEQA Section 21092(b)(1) requesting “immediate access to any and all documents referenced or relied upon” in the MND (“MND Request”) (emphasis added).3 On January 4, 2023, we submitted a letter to the City pursuant to California Public Records Act, Government Code §§ 6250, et seq. and Article I, section 3(b) of the California Constitution, requesting “immediate access to any and all records referring or related” to the Project (“PRA Request”) (emphasis added).4 The MND Request and the PRA Request were sent separately to avoid confusion as to what documents and records were sought.

2 See City of Fontana, Notice of Intent To Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Notice of Public Hearing, Fontana Square Project, available at
https://www.fontana.org/DocumentCenter/View/40643/Fontana-Square-MCN-20-083-PHN-. 3 See Exhibit A, Letter from Adams, Broadwell, Joseph & Cardozo (“ABJC”) re Request for Access to Documents Referenced in the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Fontana Square Project (Master Case No. 20-083) (January 4, 2023).
4 See Exhibit B, Letter from ABJC re Request for Immediate Access to Public Records – Fontana Square Project (Master Case No. 20-083) (January 4, 2023).

January 12, 2023

Page 3 ends

6452-005j
On January 4, 2023, the City provided an initial response to our PRA Request through email indicating that the request was received. However, to date, the City has not provided any MND reference documents in response to our MND Request.

During our subsequent review of the MND, we have identified several documents and files that are referenced in the MND which have not been provided in response to our MND Request that are not accompanied by weblinks in the MND or its appendices. These missing documents are critical to understanding and commenting on the MND’s analysis of the Project’s impacts to several critical resource areas, including, in particular, the MND’s air quality, noise, greenhouse gas, and hazardous materials analyses. We are unable to meaningfully review and comment on the MND without these documents.

We found that the following reference documents were not provided in the MND or its appendices:

IS/MND:
• California Air Resources Board, Climate Change Scoping Plan, 2008. • Elliott H. Berger, Rick Neitzel, and Cynthia A. Kladden. Noise Navigator Sound Level Database with Over 1700 Measurement Values, July 6, 2010. • Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual, September 2018.
• Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual, Table 7-2, Page 179, September 2018. • Kariel, H. G., Noise in Rural Recreational Environments, Canadian Acoustics 19(5), 3-10, 1991.
• City of Fontana. 2018. Fontana Fire Protection District Strategic Plan 2018.5

Appendix A:
• Unlocked CalEEMod input files
• California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA), Health Effects, 2018.
• California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA), Health Risk Assessments for Proposed Land Use Projects, 2009.

5 MND, p. 168 (Footnote 48 includes a link to this document. However, the link directs to a local file that is not accessible by the public, i.e.
file:///C:/Users/ruben.salas/Downloads/Fontana_Fire_Protection_District_ Strategic_Plan_2018%20(1) .pdf.)
January 12, 2023

Page 4 ends

6452-005j
• California Air Resources Board, Aerometric Data Analysis and Measurement System (ADAM) Top Four Summaries from 2018 to 2020, 2021. • California Air Resources Board, Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective, 2005.
• California Air Resources Board, Current Air Quality Standards, 2016. • California Air Resources Board, Risk Reduction Plan to Reduce Particulate Matter Emissions from Diesel-Fueled Engines and Vehicles, 2000. • Federal Highway Administration, Interim Guidance on Mobile Source Air Toxic Analysis in NEPA Documents, 2016.
• Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Risk Assessment Guidelines, 2015.
• South Coast Air Quality Management District, 2016 Air Quality Management Plan, March 2017.
• South Coast Air Quality Management District, CEQA Air Quality Handbook, 1993.
• South Coast Air Quality Management District, Localized Significance Threshold Methodology, 2009.
• United States Environmental Protection Agency, National Ambient Air Quality Standards Table, 2016.
• United States Environmental Protection Agency, Nonattainment Areas for Criteria Pollutants, 2019.
• United States Environmental Protection Agency, Policy Assessment for the Review of the Lead National Ambient Air Quality Standards, 2013.

Appendix D:
• California Air Resources Board, California’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan, 2017.
• Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis, 2007.
• Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis, Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2013. • National Research Council, Advancing the Science of Climate Change, 2010. • San Bernardino County Transportation Authority, San Bernardino County Regional Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan, March 2014.
• State of California, Code of Regulations Section 15065.5a, 2018. • Southern California Association of Governments, Connect SoCal - 2020 - 2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy, 2020. • South Coast Air Quality Management District, Minutes for the GHG CEQA Significance Threshold Stakeholder Working Group #13, 2009.

January 12, 2023

Page 5 ends

6452-005j
• U.S. EPA, Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990- 2016, 2018.
• U.S. EPA, Methane and Nitrous Oxide Emission from Natural Sources, 2010. • U.S. EPA, Overview of Greenhouse Gases, 2018.

Appendix G:
• California Department of Transportation, California Vehicle Noise Emission Levels, 1987.
• California Department of Transportation, Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol, 2011.
• California Department of Transportation, Technical Noise Supplement to the Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol, 2013.
• California Department of Transportation, Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual, 2020.
• Federal Highway Administration, Roadway Construction Noise Model, 2006. • Federal Highway Administration, Roadway Construction Noise Model User’s Guide Final Report, 2006.
• Federal Interagency Committee on Noise, Federal Agency Review of Selected Airport Noise Analysis Issues, 1992.
• Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual, 2018.
• United States Environmental Protection Agency, Protective Noise Levels (EPA 550/9-79-100), 1979.

Without access to these critical MND reference documents during the public comment period on the MND, CARE CA and other members of the public are precluded from having the meaningful opportunity to comment on the MND that is required by CEQA. The City’s failure to make the underlying MND documents available during the entire comment period makes public review particularly burdensome in this case because of the MND’s reliance on missing documents for significance determinations and mitigation measures to address the Project’s air quality, health risk, noise, and hazardous materials impacts. Without having access to these documents, CARE CA and other members of the public are unable to evaluate the accuracy of the City’s impact analysis, or the efficacy of the City’s proposed mitigation measures. Additionally, the size of the MND and the Project’s complexity make it difficult to effectively comment on the MND without the referenced documents by the current comment deadline of January 17, 2023.

The courts have held that the failure to provide even a few pages of a CEQA documents for a portion of the CEQA review period invalidates the entire CEQA process, and that such a failure must be remedied by permitting additional public January 12, 2023

Page 6 ends

6452-005j
comment.6 It is also well settled that an MND may not rely on hidden studies or documents that are not provided to the public.7 By failing to make all documents referenced in the MND “readily available” during the current comment period, the City is violating the clear procedural mandates of CEQA, to the detriment of CARE CA and other members of the public who wish to meaningfully review and comment on the MND.

II. THE PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING IS PREMATURE

On December 23, 2022, the City issued a notice stating that the Project will be considered by the City of Fontana Planning Commission on January 17, 2023.

The Planning Commission has approval authority for the Project’s land use permits, including the conditional use permits, design review, tentative parcel map and variance applications.8 At the hearing, the Commission will therefore consider adoption of the MND, and approval of the Project’s entitlement applications.9 The hearing will be conducted the same day as the close of the IS/MND public comment period. The January 17 hearing date for the Project is therefore premature because decision-makers will not have the opportunity to consider all comments received on the MND before making a decision on the Project, as required by CEQA.

CEQA’s “purpose is to inform the public and its responsible officials of the environmental consequences of their decisions before they are made. Thus, the [CEQA document] protects not only the environment, but also informed self- government.”10 Here, the hearing notice indicates that the City is planning on approving the Project without considering all public comments received during the mandatory CEQA comment period on the IS/MND.

CEQA requires the lead agency to receive and consider all public comments received on the MND.11 The purpose of the public comment period is to foster public participation.12 CEQA Guidelines § 15074(b) states:

6 Ultramar v. South Coast Air Quality Man. Dist. (1993) 17 Cal.App.4th 689, 699. 7 Santiago County Water District v. County of Orange (1981) 118 Cal.App.3rd 818, 831 (“Whatever is required to be considered in an EIR must be in that formal report; what any official might have known from other writings or oral presentations cannot supply what is lacking in the report.”). 8 City of Fontana Development Code §§ 30.120, 30-150.
9 City of Fontana, Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Notice of Public Hearing, Master Case No. 20-083 (December 23, 2022) available at https://www.fontana.org/DocumentCenter/View/40643/Fontana-Square-MCN-20-083-PHN- 10 Citizens of Goleta Valley v. Bd. of Supervisors (“Goleta Valley”) (1990) 52 Cal.3d 553, 564, internal citations omitted.
11 14 Cal. Code Regs. § 15074(b).
12 14 Cal. Code Regs § 15201.

January 12, 2023

Page 7 ends

6452-005j
Prior to approving a project, the decision-making body of the lead agency shall consider the proposed negative declaration or mitigated negative declaration together with any comments received during the public review process.

The decision-making body shall adopt the proposed negative declaration or mitigated negative declaration only if it finds on the basis of the whole record before it ( including the initial study and any comments received), that there is no sub stantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment and that the negative declaration or mitigated negative declaration reflects the lead agency's independent judgment and analysis.13

Holding a Planning Commission meeting to consider and approve the Project before the City has reviewed and responded to comments on the IS/MND would be a violation of CEQA. The Notice of Intent to adopt the MND does not set a cutoff time for submission of public comments on January 17, implying that comments may be submitted anytime of the day or evening. The Planning Commission hearing is scheduled for 6:00 p.m. during the last day of the public comment period. The hearing would therefore occur before the close of the MND public comment period and would not enable the Planning Commission to consider all comments received on the MND and to exercise independent judgement and analysis as required by CEQA.

The City must continue the Planning Commission hearing to a date after the City has had an opportunity to evaluate any comments on the IS/MND. This would allow for meaningful participation by the public and the detailed consideration of the Project’s environmental impacts that CEQA requires.

Accordingly, we request that:

1) The City immediately provide us with access to the missing MND reference documents identified in this letter, including in particular the unlocked Excel spreadsheets that support the emissions calculations in Appendix A.

13 14 Cal. Code Regs. § 15074(b) (emphasis added).

January 12, 2023

Page 8 ends

6452-005j
2) The City extend the public review and comment period on the MND for at least 20 days from the date on which the City releases these documents for public review.14 If the missing documents are provided today, we request an extension to February 1, 2023.

3) The City continue the January 17, 2023 Planning Commission hearing to a date following the close of the public comment period which ensure that the Commission will have adequate time to consider all public comments received during the MND’s public comment period.

Given the short time before the current comment deadline, please contact me as soon as possible with your response to this request, but no later than Thursday January 13, 2023.

Please feel free to call or email with any questions: Tel: (650) 589-1660, Email: [email protected]. Thank you for your prompt attention and response to this matter.

Sincerely,

Kevin Carmichael

KTC:ljl

14 This Project has a 20-day public comment period, pursuant to 14 CCR § 15105(b).

EXHIBIT A

6452-003acp
KEVIN T. CARMICHAEL
CHRISTINA M. CARO
THOMAS A. ENSLOW
KELILAH D. FEDERMAN
RICHARD M. FRANCO
ANDREW J. GRAF
TANYA A. GULESSERIAN
RACHAEL E. KOSS
AIDAN P. MARSHALL
TARA C. RENGIFO

Of Counsel
MARC D. JOSEPH
DANIEL L. CARDOZO

SACRAMENTO OFFICE

520 CAPITOL MALL, SUITE 350
SACRAMENTO, CA 95814-4721
TEL: (916) 444-6201
FAX: (916) 444-6209

ADAMS BROADWELL JOSEPH & CARDOZO

A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

601 GATEWAY BOULEVARD, SUITE 1000
SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94080-7037
___________

TEL: (650) 589-1660
FAX: (650) 589-5062
[email protected]

printed on recycled paper

January 4, 2023

Via Email and U.S. Mail
Patty Nevins, Director
Planning Department
City of Fontana
8353 Sierra Avenue
Fontana, CA 92335
Email: [email protected]

Via Email Only
Salvador Quintanilla, Senior Planner
Email: [email protected]

Germaine McClellan Key, City Clerk
Office of the City Clerk
City of Fontana
8353 Sierra Avenue
Fontana, CA 92335
Email: [email protected]

Re: Request for Access to Documents Referenced in the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Fontana Square Project (Master Case No. 20-083)

Dear Ms. Nevins, Ms. Key and Mr. Quintanilla:

We are writing on behalf of Californians Allied for a Responsible Economy (“CARE CA”) to request immediate access to all documents referenced or relied upon in the Mitigated Negative Declaration (“MND”) prepared for the Fontana Square Project, Master Case No. 20-083, (“Project”) proposed by Citrus Development, LLC (“Applicant”). This request excludes a copy of the MND and its appendices. This request also excludes any documents that are currently available on the Project’s webpage on the City of Fontana website, as of today’s date.1

1 Accessed https://www.fontana.org/2137/Environmental-Documents on January 4, 2023.

January 4, 2023

Page 2 ends

6452-003acp

printed on recycled paper
other associated improvements. The Project is located at 16014 S. Highland Avenue, Fontana, CA 92336 (APNs: 0228-301-01 through -08, 0228-310-20, -21, -22, -23, 0228-310-33 through -49, -51, and -52).

Our request for access to all documents referenced in the MND is made pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), which requires that all documents referenced, incorporated by reference, and relied upon in an environmental review document be made available to the public for the entire comment period.2

If the requested documents are in electronic format, please email them using a file hosting program such as NextRequest, Sharepoint or a similar service.

Alternatively, if the electronic documents are 10 MB or less (or can be easily broken into chunks of 10 MB or less), they may be emailed to me as attachments.

Please use the following contact information for all correspondence regarding this request:

Sheila M. Sannadan
Adams Broadwell Joseph & Cardozo
601 Gateway Boulevard, Ste. 1000
South San Francisco, CA 94080
Email: [email protected]
Phone: (650) 589-1660

Thank you for your assist ance with this matter.

S i n c e r e l y ,

Sienna Shankel
L e g a l A s s i s t a n t

SLS:acp

2 See Public Resources Code § 21092(b)(1) (stating that “all documents referenced in the draft environmental impact report or negative declaration” shall be made “available for review”); 14 Cal. Code Reg. § 15072(g)(4) (stating that all documents incorporated by reference in the MND . . . “shall be readily accessible to the public”); see also Vineyard Area Citizens for Responsible Growth, Inc. v. City of Rancho Cordova (2007) 40 Cal.4th 412, 442, as modified (Apr. 18, 2007) (EIR must transparently incorporate and describe the reference materials relied on in its analysis); Santiago County Water District v. County of Orange (1981) 118 Cal.App.3rd 818, 831 (“[W]hatever is required to be considered in an EIR must be in that formal report. . .”), internal citations omitted.

EXHIBIT B

6452-002acp
KEVIN T. CARMICHAEL
CHRISTINA M. CARO
THOMAS A. ENSLOW
KELILAH D. FEDERMAN
RICHARD M. FRANCO
ANDREW J. GRAF
TANYA A. GULESSERIAN
RACHAEL E. KOSS
AIDAN P. MARSHALL
TARA C. RENGIFO

Of Counsel
MARC D. JOSEPH
DANIEL L. CARDOZO

SACRAMENTO OFFICE

520 CAPITOL MALL, SUITE 350
SACRAMENTO, CA 95814-4721
TEL: (916) 444-6201
FAX: (916) 444-6209

ADAMS BROADWELL JOSEPH & CARDOZO

A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

601 GATEWAY BOULEVARD, SUITE 1000
SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94080-7037
___________

TEL: (650) 589-1660
FAX: (650) 589-5062
[email protected]

printed on recycled paper

January 4, 2022

Via Email and U.S. Mail
Via Email Only
Salvador Quintanilla, Senior Planner
Email: [email protected]

Via Online Portal
https://www.fontana.org/formcenter/city-14/public-records-request-form-85

Re: Request for Immediate Access to Public Records – Fontana Square Project (Master Case No. 20-083)

Dear Ms. Nevins, Ms. Key and Mr. Quintanilla:

We are writing on behalf of Californians Allied for a Responsible Economy (“CARE CA”) to request immediate access to any and all records referring or related to the Fontana Square Project, Master Case No. 20-083, (“Project”) proposed by Citrus Development, LLC (“Applicant”). This request includes, but is not limited to, any and all file materials, applications, correspondence, resolutions, memos, notes, analyses, electronic mail messages, files, maps, charts, and/or any other documents related to the Project.

The Project consists of a multi-tenant commercial development composed of a banquet hall (2 stories, 38,907 SF), a dual branded Holiday Inn Express/Staybridge Suites hotel (5 stories, 121,094 SF), a convenience store/restaurant (5,000 SF), and an In-N-Out Burger (3,885 SF). The Project includes onsite improvements such as decorative landscaping, surface parking, a drive-through, security lighting and Patty Nevins, Director
Planning Department
City of Fontana
8353 Sierra Avenue
Fontana, CA 92335
Email: [email protected]
Germaine McClellan Key, City Clerk
Office of the City Clerk
City of Fontana
8353 Sierra Avenue
Fontana, CA 92335
Email: [email protected]

January 4, 2023

Page 2 ends

6452-002acp

This request is made pursuant to the California Public Records Act, Government Code §§ 6250, et seq. In addition, we request these materials pursuant to Article I, section 3(b) of the California Constitution, which provides a constitutional right of access to information concerning the conduct of the government. Article I, section 3(b) provides that any statutory right to information shall be broadly construed to provide the greatest access to government information and further requires that any statute that limits the right of access to information be narrowly construed.

We request immediate access to review the above documents pursuant to section 6253(a) of the Public Records Act, which requires public records to be “open to inspection at all times during the office hours of the state or local agency” and provides that “every person has a right to inspect any public record.” Gov. Code § 6253(a). Therefore, the 10-day response period applicable to a “request for a copy of records” under Section 6253(c) does not apply to this request.

Pursuant to Government Code section 6253.9, if the requested documents are in electronic format, please email them using a file hosting program such as NextRequest, Sharepoint or a similar service. Alternatively, if the electronic documents are 10 MB or less (or can be easily broken into chunks of 10 MB or less), they may be emailed to me as attachments.

Please use the following contact information for all correspondence regarding this request:

Sheila M. Sannadan
Adams Broadwell Joseph & Cardozo
601 Gateway Boulevard, Ste. 1000
South San Francisco, CA 94080
Email: [email protected]
Phone: (650) 589-1660

January 4, 2023

Page 3 ends

6452-002acp

printed on recycled paper
Thank you for your assist ance with this matter.

S i n c e r e l y ,

Sienna Shankel
Legal Assistant
SLS:acp

6452-003acp
KEVIN T. CARMICHAEL
CHRISTINA M. CARO
THOMAS A. ENSLOW
KELILAH D. FEDERMAN
RICHARD M. FRANCO
ANDREW J. GRAF
TANYA A. GULESSERIAN
RACHAEL E. KOSS
AIDAN P. MARSHALL
TARA C. RENGIFO

Of Counsel
MARC D. JOSEPH
DANIEL L. CARDOZO

SACRAMENTO OFFICE

520 CAPITOL MALL, SUITE 350
SACRAMENTO, CA 95814-4721
TEL: (916) 444-6201
FAX: (916) 444-6209

ADAMS BROADWELL JOSEPH & CARDOZO

A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

601 GATEWAY BOULEVARD, SUITE 1000
SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94080-7037
___________

TEL: (650) 589-1660
FAX: (650) 589-5062
[email protected]

printed on recycled paper

January 4, 2023

Via Email and U.S. Mail
Patty Nevins, Director
Planning Department
City of Fontana
8353 Sierra Avenue
Fontana, CA 92335
Email: [email protected]

Via Email Only
Salvador Quintanilla, Senior Planner
Email: [email protected]

Germaine McClellan Key, City Clerk
Office of the City Clerk
City of Fontana
8353 Sierra Avenue
Fontana, CA 92335
Email: [email protected]

Re: Request for Access to Documents Referenced in the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Fontana Square Project (Master Case No. 20-083)

Dear Ms. Nevins, Ms. Key and Mr. Quintanilla:

1 Accessed https://www.fontana.org/2137/Environmental-Documents on January 4, 2023.

January 4, 2023

Page 2 ends

6452-003acp

If the requested documents are in electronic format, please email them using a file hosting program such as NextRequest, Sharepoint or a similar service.

Alternatively, if the electronic documents are 10 MB or less (or can be easily broken into chunks of 10 MB or less), they may be emailed to me as attachments.

Please use the following contact information for all correspondence regarding this request:

Sheila M. Sannadan
Adams Broadwell Joseph & Cardozo
601 Gateway Boulevard, Ste. 1000
South San Francisco, CA 94080
Email: [email protected]
Phone: (650) 589-1660

Thank you for your assist ance with this matter.

S i n c e r e l y ,

Sienna Shankel
L e g a l A s s i s t a n t

SLS:acp

Fontana City CouncilApril 25, 2023

Fontana City Council
April 25, 2023