RESOLUTION NO. 2021-XXX
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SANTA ANA OVERRULING THE ORANGE COUNTY
AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION’S DETERMINATION
THAT THE PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN UPDATE IS
INCONSISTENT WITH THE AIRPORT ENVIRONS LAND
USE PLAN FOR JOHN WAYNE AIRPORT, INCLUDING
SUPPORTIVE FINDINGS
WHEREAS, Article 5 of Chapter 3 of Division 1 of Title 7 (commencing with Section 65300) of the Government Code requires the City to prepare and adopt a comprehensive, long-term general plan for the physical development of the City; and WHEREAS, the City of Santa Ana now seeks to adopt a comprehensive update to the Santa Ana General Plan; and
WHEREAS, the General Plan Update (“project”) also requires the certification of the Final Recirculated Program Environmental Impact Report and related documents that have been completed for the project, which approval will be concurrent with the approval of the General Plan Update; and
WHEREAS, the project as currently proposed entails, among other things, (1) the revision to the State mandated Elements of the General Plan; (2) the inclusion of optional Elements to the General Plan; and (3) approval of General Plan Amendment (GPA) No. 2020-06, which would result in a comprehensive update to the existing General Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City of Santa Ana is also located partially within the area contained within the scope of the Airport Environs Land Use Plan for John Wayne Airport (“AELUP”); and
WHEREAS, California Public Utilities Code section 21676(b) requires the City to refer projects requiring a general plan amendment or a zone change to the Airport Land Use Commission for Orange County (“ALUC”) for consistency with the AELUP; and WHEREAS, the City submitted the General Plan Update to the ALUC for consistency review on September 17, 2020; and
WHEREAS, on October 15, 2020, the ALUC, by vote of 5-0, found the General Plan Update to be inconsistent with the Airport Environs Land Use Plan for John Wayne Airport pursuant to AELUP sections 1.2, 2.1.4, and 3.2.1, and Public Utilities Code section 21674, due to (1) proferred aircraft noise and safety issues relative to the allowed placement of residential units within the flight corridor in the 55 Freeway/Dyer Road Focus Area and (2) proferred building height issues in a portion of the South Bristol Street Focus Area (between MacArthur Boulevard and Sunflower Avenue); and City Council 32 – 309 1/18/2022
Resolution No. 2021-XXX
WHEREAS, pursuant to Public Utilities Code section 21676(b), the City may overrule the ALUC by a two-thirds vote of the City Council if it makes specific findings that the project is consistent with the purpose of the State Aeronautics Act; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Public Utilities Code section 21676(b), on October 16, 2020, with the requisite 45-day notice, the Santa Ana City Council adopted a resolution of intent to overrule the determination of inconsistency by the ALUC, Resolution No. 2020-078, and provided the ALUC with notice thereof, including proposed findings; and WHEREAS, by letter dated November 12, 2020, and in accordance with Public Utilities Code section 21676, the ALUC submitted written comments to the City addressing the City’s proposed overruling; and
WHEREAS, on November 9, 2020, the Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the Final Program Environmental Report and General Plan Update, at which the Planning Commission voted not to certify the Final PEIR and continue work on the General Plan Update to a future date to allow additional time for outreach to Santa Ana’s environmental justice communities and in view of the COVID19 pandemic; and WHEREAS, the Santa Ana General Plan Update subsequently underwent revisions that were not materially different from what was originally submitted to the ALUC for review, leaving the Land Use Element unchanged, nor were any new elements added that include changes within the JWA Planning area; and WHEREAS, the written comments received from the ALUC have been included in the public record as required by Public Utilities Code section 21676; and WHEREAS, in 2021, a Recirculated Draft Program Environmental Impact Report was prepared and circulated in accordance with all legal requisites, as a supplemental analysis to the original Draft PEIR to reflect the updates to the project and based on an intensive, extended community outreach program conducted by the City between January and May 2021; and
WHEREAS, on November 8, 2021, the Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the Final Recirculated PEIR and General Plan Update. After hearing all relevant testimony from staff, the public, and the City’s consultant team, the Planning Commission voted to recommend that the City Council certify the Final Recirculated PEIR, adopt the findings of fact, the statement of overriding considerations, and the mitigation monitoring and reporting program, and approve the project; and
WHEREAS, on December 7, 2021, the City Council conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the Final Recirculated PEIR, General Plan Update, and the proposed overruling of the determination of inconsistency by the ALUC, at which hearing members of the public were afforded an opportunity to comment and the project was fully considered.
City Council 32 – 310 1/18/2022
Resolution No. 2021-XXX
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Santa Ana as follows:
Section 1. The City of Santa Ana is required to provide findings of fact supporting the overrule of the ALUC’s determination of inconsistency as required by Public Utilities Code section 21676(b). Those findings are attached as Exhibit A and incorporated here by reference as if set forth in full.
Section 2. Based on these findings of fact and the associated substantial evidence in the public record, the City Council finds that the proposed action by the City on the General Plan Update is consistent with the purposes of the State Aeronautics Act as stated in PUC Section 21670 and consistent with the AELUP.
Section 3. Based on the above evidence and findings made, and the remainder of the record in this matter, the City Council of the City of Santa Ana hereby overrules the Orange County ALUC’s determination that the General Plan Update is inconsistent with Airport Environs Land Use Plan for John Wayne Airport.
Section 4. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption by the City Council, and the Clerk of the Council shall attest to and certify the vote adopting this Resolution.
ADOPTED this _____ day of ____________, 2021.
________________________________
Vicente Sarmiento
Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Sonia R. Carvalho, City Attorney
By:
John M. Funk
Sr. Assistant City Attorney
AYES: Councilmembers
NOES: Councilmembers
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers
NOT PRESENT: Councilmembers _
City Council 32 – 311 1/18/2022
Resolution No. 2021-XXX
CERTIFICATION OF ATTESTATION AND ORIGINALITY
I, DAISY GOMEZ, Clerk of the Council, do hereby attest to and certify the attached Resolution No. 2021-XXX to be the original resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Ana on _______________.
Date: ______________________ ________________________________ Clerk of the Council
City of Santa Ana
City Council 32 – 312 1/18/2022
Resolution No. 2021-XXX
EXHIBIT A
FINDINGS OF FACT
SUBJECT: CITY OF SANTA ANA NOTICE OF INTENT TO OVERRULE THE ORANGE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION’S DETERMINATION OF
INCONSISTENCY FOR THE CITY OF SANTA ANA COMPREHENSIVE
GENERAL PLAN UPDATE, GOLDEN CITY BEYOND (2045)
I. INTRODUCTION
The City of Santa Ana (“City”) is required to provide findings supporting the overrule of the Orange County Airport Land Use Commission’s (“ALUC”) determination of inconsistency as required in the California Public Utilities Code (“PUC”) Section 21676(b). Based on the following Findings of Fact and the associated substantial evidence in the public record, the proposed action by the City on the General Plan Update, Golden City Beyond (2045) (“Project”) is consistent with the purposes of the State Aeronautics Act as stated in PUC Section 21670, which provides, in relevant part:
“It is the purpose of this article to protect public health, safety, and welfare by ensuring the orderly expansion of airports and the adoption of land use measures that minimize the public’s exposure to excessive noise and safety hazards within areas around public airports to the extent that these areas are not already devoted to incompatible uses.”
Specifically, the City’s proposed action on the Project provides for the orderly development of John Wayne Airport (“JWA”), and its surrounding area and promotes the overall goals and objectives of the State noise standards by avoiding new noise and safety problems, and protecting the public health, safety and welfare through the adoption of land use measures that minimize the public’s exposure to excessive noise and safety hazards to the extent that this area is not already devoted to incompatible uses.
II. FRAMEWORK
It is in the public interest to: (1) provide for the orderly development of each public use airport in this state and the area surrounding these airports so as to (2) promote the overall goals and objectives of the California airport noise standards adopted pursuant to PUC Section 21669 and to (3) prevent the creation of new noise and safety problems.
A. To provide for the orderly development of JWA and the area surrounding the airport, the ALUC adopted the 2008 Airport Environs Land Use Plan for John Wayne Airport (“JWA AELUP”) on April 17, 2008. The JWA AELUP guides development proposals to provide for orderly development of the airport and the area surrounding the airport through implementation of the standards in Section 2.1 (aircraft noise, safety compatibility zones, building height restrictions).
B. The ALUC also adopted a separate Airport Environs Land Use Plan for Heliports (“Heliports AELUP”) on June 19, 2008.
City Council 32 – 313 1/18/2022
Resolution No. 2021-XXX
C. The ALUC is required to use the California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook (“Handbook”) that was updated by the California Department of Transportation, Division of Aeronautics (“Caltrans”) in 2011. Neither the JWA AELUP nor the Heliports AELUP have been updated to incorporate the Handbook’s guidance. Likewise, the JWA AELUP has not been updated with information about the operation and environmental effects of JWA as reflected in its most recent Final Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”), certified by the Orange County Board of Supervisors on June 25, 2019 for the General Aviation Improvement Program (“GAIP”).
D. On September 17, 2020, the City of Santa Ana presented the Project to the ALUC for a determination of consistency with the JWA AELUP and Heliports AELUP.
E. The ALUC staff report dated October 15, 2020 (“Staff Report”) recommends that the ALUC find the Project inconsistent with the JWA AELUP per Sections 1.2, 2.4.1, and
3.2.1 of the JWA AELUP, and per PUC Section 21674, due to 1) proffered aircraft “noise and safety issues” relative to the allowed placement of residential units “within the flight corridor” in the 55 Freeway/Dyer Road Focus Area; and 2) proffered building height issues in a portion of the South Bristol Street Focus Area (between MacArthur Boulevard and Sunflower Avenue).
F. The ALUC Staff Report recommends that the ALUC find the Project consistent with the Heliports AELUP, with the condition that the City include a statement in the General Plan Update (Safety Element Policy S-4.4) that any proposals for heliports/helipads within the City be submitted through the City to ALUC for a consistency determination.
G. On October 15, 2020, the ALUC held a public hearing and adopted a resolution finding the Project inconsistent with the JWA AELUP for the stated reasons set forth in the Staff Report, and further finding the Project consistent with the Heliports AELUP on the condition set forth in the Staff Report.
H. The City of Santa Ana has the general police power to control land use within its territorial jurisdiction. (Cal. Const., art. XI 11, § 7). This constitutional authority is acknowledged in State law (PUC §§ 21670, 21676) and the ALUC process (JWA AELUP § 4.11) allowing for overrule of an ALUC finding of inconsistency.
I. Pursuant to PUC Section 21676(b), the City may overrule the commission by a twothirds vote of the City Council if it makes specific findings that the Project is consistent with the purposes of the State Aeronautics Act, as stated in PUC Section 21670.
J. The City finds that the Project is consistent with the JWA AELUP and with the purposes of the State Aeronautics Act based on the following Findings of Fact and substantial evidence.
III. FINDINGS OF FACT
A. General Plan Update. The Project encompasses the entire City of Santa Ana. The General Plan Update set forth in the Project will change zoning and land use within five (5) geographic Focus Areas within the City. The comments in ALUC’s Staff Report and ALUC’s determination of inconsistency refer only to changes in land use within these five (5) Focus Areas.
1. The vast majority of the Project falls outside of the JWA AELUP planning area, which is defined in Section 1.7 of the JWA AELUP as “the furthest extent of the 60 CNEL City Council 32 – 314 1/18/2022
Resolution No. 2021-XXX
Contour, the FAR Part 77 Notification Surface and the runway safety zones associated with the airport.”
2. Both the Grand Ave/17th Street Focus Area and the West Santa Ana Boulevard Focus Area fall completely outside of the JWA AELUP planning area.
3. The 55 Freeway/Dyer Road Focus Area and South Bristol Focus Area are both located entirely within the JWA AELUP planning area.
4. The South Main Focus Area is located partially within the JWA AELUP planning area.
B. Justification for Finding Project Consistent with the Purposes of PUC Section 21670.
1. Noise. The residential and commercial land uses under the proposed Project are consistent with the aircraft noise standards of the JWA AELUP and the requirements of PUC Section 21670.
a. The majority of the Project falls outside of the 60 dBA CNEL aircraft noise contour (Exhibit 2).
(1) Per the JWA AELUP, all land uses are normally consistent within the 60 dBA CNEL aircraft noise contour using conventional construction methods. No special noise reduction methods are required. See JWA AELUP at 23, Table 1.
b. The vast majority of the Project is located outside of the JWA 65 dBA CNEL aircraft noise contour.
(1) Per the JWA AELUP, commercial (e.g. retail and office), community facilities (e.g. churches, libraries, schools, preschools, day-care centers, hospitals, nursing/convalescent homes, & other noise sensitive uses), and industrial uses are all normally consistent within the 65 dBA CNEL aircraft noise contour. See JWA AELUP at 23, Table 1.
(2) Per the JWA AELUP, single and multifamily residential uses are conditionally consistent within the 65 dBA CNEL aircraft noise contour. c. Of the five (5) Focus Areas that will include a change in zoning and land use designation under the Project, only the 55 Freeway/Dyer Road Focus Area lies partially within the 65 dBA CNEL aircraft noise contour. d. The General Plan Update states, as Policy N-1.3, that it shall be City policy to “[c]ollaborate with local and regional transit agencies and other jurisdictions to minimize regional traffic noise and other sources of noise in the City.” e. Consistent with the JWA AELUP, the General Plan Update states, as Policy N3.3, that it shall be City policy to “[r]equire all residential land uses in 60 dB(A) CNEL or 65 dB(A) CNEL Noise Contours to be sufficiently mitigated so as not to exceed an interior standard of 45 Db(A) CNEL.”
f. Based on the foregoing, the Project will not result in the exposure of City residents to excess noise within the meaning of PUC Section 21670.
City Council 32 – 315 1/18/2022
Resolution No. 2021-XXX
2. Safety. The residential and commercial land uses under the proposed project are consistent with the safety standards of the JWA AELUP.
a. Section 2.1.2 of the JWA AELUP describes the airport’s safety compatibility zones.
(1) Per Section 2.1.2 of the JWA AELUP, “Safety and compatibility zones depict which land uses are acceptable and which are unacceptable in various portions of airport environs.”
(2) The purpose of these zones, per the JWA AELUP, is to “support the continued use and operation of an airport by establishing compatibility and safety standards to promote air navigational safety and to reduce potential safety hazards for persons living, working or recreating near JWA.” b. The JWA AELUP identifies the following Safety Zones:
(1) Zone 1: Runway Protection Zone
(2) Zone 2: Inner Approach/Departure
(3) Zone 3: Inner Turning Zone
(4) Zone 4: Outer Approach/Departure Zone
(5) Zone 5: Sideline Zone
(6) Zone 6: Traffic Pattern Zone
c. The Project is not in the JWA runway protection zones (RPZ). d. None of the Project Focus Areas are in any of the JWA AELUP safety zones.
JWA AELUP Safety Zone 6 overlays a small portion of the City south of MacArthur Boulevard, however the Project does not propose any change in land use or zoning in this area.
e. The ALUC Staff Report states that “The proposed changes in Land Use in the 55/Dyer Focus Area would result in 9,952 total residential units within the flight corridor for John Wayne Airport subjecting future residents to noise and safety issues.”
(1) As noted above and in Section 2.1.2 and Appendix D of the JWA AELUP, the “flight corridor for John Wayne Airport” is not an identified Safety Zone for JWA. Nor is a “flight corridor” a defined, restrictive term in the JWA AELUP, the PUC, or the Federal Aviation Regulations.
f. No part of the Project will be inconsistent with the policies set forth in Section
2.1.2 of the JWA AELUP regarding Safety Compatibility Zones. Furthermore, the ALUC did not find, and cannot find, that the Project is inconsistent with Section
2.1.2 of the JWA AELUP.
g. Based on the foregoing, the Project will not result in the exposure of City residents to excessive safety hazards within the meaning of PUC Section 21670.
City Council 32 – 316 1/18/2022
Resolution No. 2021-XXX
3. Height. The residential and commercial land uses under the proposed project are consistent with the height standards of the JWA AELUP, which are stated in the Federal Aviation Regulations, 14 C.F.R. Part 77, relating to Safe, Efficient Use and Protection of the Navigable Airspace.
a. The General Plan Update states, as Policy S-4.1 Structures above 200 feet, “[p]roposed projects that would exceed a height of 200 feet above existing grade shall be required to file a Form 7460-1 with the Federal Aviation Administration (“FAA”).
b. In response to Recommendation 1.b. from the ALUC Staff Report, the General Plan Update is revised to state, as Policy S-4.2 Federal Aviation Regulation Part 77, “[d]o not approve buildings and structures that would penetrate Federal Aviation Regulation (“FAR”) Part 77 Imaginary Obstruction Surfaces, unless, consistent with PUC Section 21240, such building or structure is determined by the FAA to pose “no hazard” to air navigation.” Additionally, under this Policy, applicants proposing buildings or structures that penetrate the 100:1 Notification Surface will be required to file a Form 7460-1 Notice of Proposed Construction or Alteration with FAA and provide a copy of the FAA determination to the City and the ALUC. Referral to FAA for study under its Form 7460-1 process is appropriate because:
(1) “The United States Government has exclusive sovereignty of airspace of the United States” (49 U.S.C. § 40103(a)(1)).
(2) In order to use this airspace, the FAA Administrator is responsible for:
(i) Plans and policy for the safe use of the navigable airspace (49 U.S.C. § 40103(b)(1)); and
(ii) “[R]egulations on the flight of aircraft (including regulations on safe altitudes) for (A) navigating, protecting and identifying aircraft; (B) protecting individuals and property on the ground; (C) using the navigable airspace efficiently; and (D) preventing collision between aircraft, between aircraft and land or water vehicle, and between aircraft and airborne objects” (49 U.S.C. § 40103(b)(2)).
(3) The FAA’s aeronautical studies under FAR Part 77 are the definitive standard for assessing compliance with federal aviation safety laws and regulations (49 U.S.C. § 77.1(c)). This federal authority is recognized in State law. (PUC § sb21240).
c. The maximum allowable building heights in the zoning and land use designations proposed in the 55 Freeway/Dyer Road Focus Area range between 6 and 10 stories, or about 60 and 100 feet above ground level (“AGL”). These maximum allowable building heights would not exceed the FAR Part 77 imaginary obstruction surfaces for JWA, including the sloping, three-dimensional 50:1 Departure Surface, the sloping, three-dimensional 20:1 conical surface, and the 206’ above mean sea level (“AMSL”) horizontal surface.
d. The maximum allowable building heights in the zoning and land use designations proposed in the South Bristol Street Focus Area range between 10 and 25 City Council 32 – 317 1/18/2022
Resolution No. 2021-XXX
stories, or about 100 to 250 feet AGL. Proponents of future structures exceeding 200 feet AGL and/or structures penetrating the 100:1 Notification Surface will be required to file a Form 7460-1 Notice of Proposed Construction or Alteration with FAA and provide a copy of the FAA determination to the City. Per Policy S-4.2, the applicant would be required to obtain an FAA determination of no obstruction or no hazard to air navigation before seeking City approval. e. The maximum allowable building heights in the zoning and land use designations proposed in the South Main Street Focus Area range between 2 and 3 stories, or about 20 to 30 feet AGL. These maximum allowable building heights would not exceed the FAR Part 77 imaginary obstruction surfaces for JWA, including the sloping, three-dimensional 20:1 conical surface, and the 206’ AMSL horizontal surface.
f. The Project’s requirement that future construction and development comply with the FAA’s 7460-1 process ensures that building heights within the Project area will not pose a hazard to air navigation. This is consistent with and furthers the purposes of PUC Section 21670 by minimizing the public’s exposure to safety hazards.
g. The Project is an approval only as to land use designation and zoning. No specific structures are contemplated as part of the Project. Therefore, nothing in the Project will create an obstruction or hazard to air navigation within the meaning of 14 C.F.R. Part 77, and no part of the Project involves the proposed construction or alteration of any structure. Accordingly, no aeronautical study is required as part of the Project. See 49 U.S.C. § 44718; 14 C.F.R. Part 77; FAA Order JO 7400.2M.
h. The Project does not create a safety hazard pursuant to PUC Section 21670.
4. Heliports. Heliports are not permitted in any residential (R1, R2, R3, or R4) District pursuant to Santa Ana Municipal Code section 41-621. Outside of residential Districts, heliports are only allowed with a conditional use permit (“CUP”). a. The General Plan Update states, as Policy S-4.4 Heliport/helistop approval and requirements, “Approve the development of a heliport or helistop only if it complies with the ALUP for heliports.” Policy S-4.4 further makes it City policy to “[e]nsure that each applicant seeking a conditional use permit or similar approval for the construction or operation of a heliport or helistop complies fully with the state permit recommended by the FAA, by Orange County ALUC, and by Caltrans/Division of Aeronautics. This requirement shall be in addition to all other City development requirements.”
b. As described in Draft PEIR Section 5.8, any applicant proposing a heliport “shall undergo review by the ALUC, obtain an Airspace Analysis from the FAA as specified in Section 2.1.5 of the JWA AELUP, and confirm consistency with the JWA AELUP prior to construction, as specified in Section 4.7 of the JWA AELUP.”
c. The Project and existing provisions within the Santa Ana Municipal Code restrict the establishment of heliports within the City. Heliports are only allowed in nonresidential districts, and only once the applicant obtains a CUP following FAA City Council 32 – 318 1/18/2022
Resolution No. 2021-XXX
Airspace analysis and other review procedures. These restrictions minimize the public’s exposure to excessive noise and safety hazards, in furtherance of the purposes of PUC Section 21670.
d. ALUC has determined that the Project is consistent with the Heliports AELUP on condition that the City include a statement in the General Plan Update (Safety Element Policy S-4.4) that any proposals for heliports/helipads within the City be submitted through the City to ALUC for a consistency determination.
City Council 32 – 319 1/18/2022
Parks, Recreation, and Community Services
www.santa-ana.org/parks
Item # 33
City of Santa Ana
20 Civic Center Plaza, Santa Ana, CA 92701
Staff Report
January 18, 2022
TOPIC: Proposed Events Permit Policy and Amendments to the Fiscal Year 2021-2022 Miscellaneous Fees Resolution specific to Film Permits and Park Facility Permits AGENDA TITLE:
Public Hearing - Proposed City of Santa Ana Events Permit Policy and Amendments to the Fiscal Year 2021-2022 Miscellaneous Fees Resolution specific to Film Permits and Park Facility Permits
RECOMMENDED ACTION
1. Adopt a resolution approving the proposed Events Permit Policy, including park facility permits, film permits, land use certificate, and special event permits.
2. Adopt a resolution amending fees in the Uniform Schedule of Miscellaneous Fees for Fiscal Year (FY) 2021-22 specific to film permits and park facility permits.
DISCUSSION
On November 16, 2021, the City Council considered adoption of a resolution approving the proposed Events Permit Policy and directed staff as follows:
1. CITY COUCIL INPUT: Bring back the proposed policy and fee amendments at the same time for City Council consideration.
ANSWER: The proposed policy and fee amendments are attached as Exhibit 1 and 2 for City Council consideration.
2. CITY COUCIL INPUT: Consider adding Cultural Celebrations, Holiday Events and Neighborhood Associations to one of the top three priority classifications.
ANSWER: The City is being purposeful in avoiding any policies that require staff to evaluate the content or message of an event when deciding whether to grant a permit or to give priority. These types of policies and/or decisions can lead to claims of constitutional violations. In the event of litigation, content-based restrictions are subject to strict scrutiny and require a compelling government interest, which is a high threshold. Anyone that would like to have a holiday event, cultural celebration or City Council 33 – 1 1/18/2022
Proposed Events Permit Policy and Amendments to the Fiscal Year 2021-2022 Miscellaneous Fees Resolution specific to Film Permits and Park Facility Permits January 18, 2022
neighborhood association event can do so by preparing an application up to one year in advance to secure the desired event location.
3. CITY COUCIL INPUT: Consider a fee exemption for film permits specific to high school and college students in Santa Ana.
ANSWER: The proposed resolution amending fees in the Uniform Schedule of Miscellaneous Fees for Fiscal Year (FY) 2021-2022 reflects no fee for Film permits specific to high school and college students residing or attending school in Santa Ana.
4. CITY COUCIL INPUT: Consider a more structured standard regarding the amount of police officers required for an event.
ANSWER: Reviewing permit applications for special events to determine how many police officers and/or private security guards will be required to ensure a safe event includes a variety of factors, such as the following: number of participants, nature of event, location of venue, will alcohol be served/present, will the event be staffed with private security guards, etc.
Generally, events with over 500 people typically require a minimum of two police officers per every 500 in attendance. Again, the nature of the event and activities will dictate whether this requirement applies or whether additional police officers may be required.
For example, a large street closure might require additional police officers to mitigate traffic and parking related concerns.
5. CITY COUCIL INPUT: Consider public safety requirements to include use of private security and/or event organizers own peace officers.
ANSWER: There are alternatives to police officers. When event attendance numbers are less than 500, use of licensed security guards to monitor/ensure security at the event is acceptable. However, additional factors, including complex/large street closures, parking issues, the inclusion of a beer garden, etc. may dictate a need for law enforcement, even when attendance numbers are less than 500.
6. CITY COUCIL INPUT: Currently, costs are prohibitive for event organizers, such as churches, when police officers are required for a large event.
ANSWER: Not all events require police officers or private security guards. For example, even though attendance at a church-sponsored event may exceed 500 people, police officers may not be required provided adequate security measures (including private security guards) are in place that ensure the safety of the attendees. On the other hand, a rock concert requiring a street closure with an expected attendance of 1,000 will likely require four police officers in addition to event private security guards. The same concert City Council 33 – 2 1/18/2022
Proposed Events Permit Policy and Amendments to the Fiscal Year 2021-2022 Miscellaneous Fees Resolution specific to Film Permits and Park Facility Permits January 18, 2022
with an expected attendance of 2,000 people would require eight police officers and a police sergeant. However, if the event organizer were to increase the number of private security guards, the number of required police officers might be less than eight.
7. CITY COUCIL INPUT: Consider making fees less cost prohibitive for smaller events that do not warrant police officers.
ANSWER: The City Council adopted the Fiscal Year 2021-22 Miscellaneous Fees Schedule specific to Land Use Certificates and Special Events on June 1, 2021. Generally, events with less than 500 people do not require police officers, provided they have their own certified private security guards. Typically, one security guard per each 50 to 100 persons in attendance will suffice unless additional security is required to monitor entry/exits/high value equipment or displays. Additional security guards and/or a security guard supervisor may be required depending on the nature of the event.
8. CITY COUCIL INPUT: Reach out to groups that previously held cultural events in the City of Santa Ana but then left for another city.
ANSWER: City staff is not aware of any previously held cultural events held in the City of Santa Ana but then left for another city due to application complications, etc.
9. CITY COUCIL INPUT: Consider an exempt category for low-key events that are coordinated at the last minute.
ANSWER: The reason the City does not consider an exempt category for low-key events that are coordinated at the last minute is due to multiple agencies review timelines (i.e. fire needs 10 working days; health agency needs one month, etc.).
10. CITY COUCIL INPUT: Consider creating a flow chart of the permit process.
ANSWER: A flow chart might be confusing to the applicant due to multiple variables of each event. A checklist attached to the application provides information to assist the applicant through the permit process.
11. CITY COUNCIL QUESTION: How, in the future, is this policy going to allow events on short notice due to the 90-day minimum requirement for Major events? ANSWER: Three months is the minimal amount for a large-scale event; it can be a safety concern if we do not have sufficient time to evaluate details of an event.
12. CITY COUNCIL QUESTION: Why did the application timeline increase from 30 days in advance to 45 days for moderate and minor events?
City Council 33 – 3 1/18/2022
Proposed Events Permit Policy and Amendments to the Fiscal Year 2021-2022 Miscellaneous Fees Resolution specific to Film Permits and Park Facility Permits January 18, 2022
ANSWER: An extra fifteen days provides time to review information submitted by an applicant, such as insurance requirements, health department documentation, etc.
Proposed Events Permit Policy
The proposed Events Permit Policy (Exhibit 1) does not include any updates post the November 16, 2021 City Council meeting.
Reservation permits are not required for use of City outdoor facilities for all gatherings with 40 or less people (SAMC Section 31- 3.) Unreserved outdoor athletics facilities, park facilities, and open space areas are available for drop-in use by private parties on a firstcome, first-served basis. Reservations have priority over drop-in/walk-on activities. Dropin use may be limited to accommodate maintenance needs of the turf on all fields.
Stadium fields and lighted sports fields are not available for drop-in activities. Examples of Drop-In activities includes a group of friends playing basketball or a family playing soccer. These are not an organized use of fields or courts, such as officiated games, uniformed teams, organized team practices, or activities offered or associated with a for profit or nonprofit organization; which would require an approved reservation.
Proposed Miscellaneous Fees for Film Permits and Park Facility Permits On September 15, 2020, the City Council received and approved the Parks, Recreation and Community Services Agency (PRCSA) Service and Financial Sustainability Study.
Through the action of receiving and approving the study, and a strategy for implementation of recommendations, the City Council accepted the use of the tools, methods, and strategies the PRCSA requires to sustain itself for the long term.
On November 17, 2020, the City Council adopted Resolution 2020-083 approving a cost recovery policy (Policy) for the PRCSA.
On June 1, 2021, the City Council adopted Resolution 2021-027 establishing a Uniform Schedule of Miscellaneous Fees for Fiscal Year 2021-22, including fees for Parks, Recreation and Community Services such as recreation programs fees, zoo education program fees, and event permit fees.
Determining amendments to Fiscal Year 2021-22 Miscellaneous Fees specific to film permits and parks facility permits included the following considerations:
PRCSA Cost Recovery Policy
Group structure (resident, non-resident)
Implementing best practices
The proposed resolution for fee amendments intends only to address fees directly associated with Film Permits and Parks Facility Permits as follows:
City Council 33 – 4 1/18/2022
Proposed Events Permit Policy and Amendments to the Fiscal Year 2021-2022 Miscellaneous Fees Resolution specific to Film Permits and Park Facility Permits January 18, 2022
a) There are seven proposed fees created for items that did not have fees before in order to increase community participation while providing residents discounted fees.
b) Change to group structure to correspond to the Events Permit Policy. Includes resident and nonresident permit priorities and corresponding fees.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
There is no environmental impact associated with this action.
FISCAL IMPACT
During the three previous Fiscal Years (FY 2017-18, FY 2018-19, FY 2019-20) the average revenue generated by (Recreation Facility Rentals 01113002-57361 & Film Permits 01113002-51301) was $32,000 annually. Despite operations effected by Federal, State, and County guidelines in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, recreation facility reservations and film permits are currently 4 percent below forecasted revenue goals for FY 2021-22 year-to-date.
While revenue forecasts remain uncertain due to COVID-19 guidelines, staff estimates that with the adoption of these amended fees that revenues will remain consistent with previous years through FY 2021-22, with an increase in recreation facility reservation and film permit revenues being realized in FY 2022-23 as the Event Permit Policy is implemented, adjusted, and optimized for maximum community impact.
EXHIBIT(S)
1. Resolution to adopt the City of Santa Ana Events Permit Policy
2. Resolution to adopt Amendments to Uniform Schedule of Miscellaneous Fees for Fiscal Year 2021-2022 specific to Film Permits and Park Facility Permits Submitted By: Lisa Rudloff, Executive Dir. of Parks, Recreation and Community Services
Approved By: Kristine Ridge, City Manager
City Council 33 – 5 1/18/2022
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-XXX
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA
APPROVING THE EVENTS PERMIT POLICY
LR 12/21/21
WHEREAS, the Parks, Recreation and Community Services Agency ("PRCSA") has proposed an Events Policy ("Policy") to provide an effective framework for the administration of event permits that provide equitable and reasonable access to City public facilities; and WHEREAS, the intent of the Policy is to provide guidance for the use of City facilities by residents, community organizations, businesses, and nonresidents for Park Facility Permits, Film Permits, Land Use Certificates, and Special Events Permits; and WHEREAS, the Parks, Recreation and Community Services Commission considered the draft Events Permit Policy at their October 28, 2021 meeting and provided input.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Santa Ana as follows:
Section 1. The Events Permit Policy, attached as Exhibit A, is hereby approved.
Section 2. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption by the City Council, and the Clerk of the Council shall attest to and certify the vote adopting this Resolution.
ADOPTED this_ day of January, 2022.
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Sonia R. Carvalho, City Attorney
Vicente Sarmiento
Mayor
By:i�-k-�
Laura A. Rossini
Chief Assistant City Attorney
AYES: Councilmembers ------------------
NOES: Councilmembers _________________ _
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers
NOT PRESENT: Councilmembers
------------------
------------------
Resolution No. 2021-XXX
Exhibit 1
City Council 33 – 6 1/18/2022
LR 12/21/21
CERTIFICATE OF ATTESTATION AND ORIGINALITY
I, DAISY GOMEZ, Clerk of the Council, do hereby attest to and certify the attached Resolution No. 2022-XXX to be the original resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Ana on January_, 2022.
Date: -------- Daisy Gomez
Clerk of the Council
City of Santa Ana
Resolution No. 2022-
XXX Page 2 of 2
Exhibit 1
City Council 33 – 7 1/18/2022
City Manager’s Authorization
City of Santa Ana Events Permit Policy Date
January 18, 2022
City of Santa Ana
Administrative
Policies and Procedures
Purpose
The purpose of the Policy is to provide an effective framework for the administration of Event permits that provide equitable and reasonable access to City public facilities. The intent of this Policy is to provide guidance for use of City facilities by residents, community organizations, businesses, and nonresidents for 1) Park Facility Permits; 2) Film Permits; 3) Land Use Certificates and 4) Special Event Permits. This Policy governs all City of Santa Ana properties and their supporting amenities.
Definition
The City Manager’s Office (CMO) or designee, are responsible for managing the City’s Events Permit Process. This Events Permit Policy (Policy) is established to ensure the use of City facilities for events 1) aligns with the City’s core mission, vision, and values; 2) provides equitable and fair access to all users; 3) remains equitably and fairly priced; 4) operates in a fiscally responsible manner; and 5) supports a healthy, safe, vibrant, and sustainable community.
Policy
1.0 Policy Establishment and Permit Fees
The CMO or designee shall implement and administer the Policy. All fees charged will be pursuant to the City’s Miscellaneous Fee Schedule, as adopted and periodically amended by the City Council.
2.0 USER CLASSIFICATIONS
User classifications are for the purposes of assessing fees and determining priority as follows in section 4.1 of this Policy.
2.1 Park and Facility Permits
The resident and nonresident permit priorities below define the scheduling priority and corresponding fees.
Priority 1
City-sponsored special event serving Santa Ana residents.
Priority 2
Resident: Non-Profit Organization
High School or College Student residing or attending school in Santa Ana (Film)
Priority 3
Resident: Private Party or Business (Not-for-Profit)
Exhibit 1
City Council 33 – 8 1/18/2022
2 Priority 4
Resident: Private Party or Business for Profit Making
Priority 5
Non-Resident: Private Party or Business (Not-for-Profit) Priority 6
Non-Resident: Private Party or Business for Profit Making
3.0 TYPES OF PERMITS
The City of Santa Ana has four (4) types of Event permits as follows:
3.1 PARK FACILITY PERMIT
Allows the temporary use of a public park, field and/or facility for conducting certain outdoor and indoor, short-term events which are conducted completely or partially on City-owned or controlled park property pursuant to SAMC Sec. 31-3.
3.2 FILM PERMIT
Allows commercial motion picture or electronic video tape in or upon any property owned or controlled by the City of Santa Ana SAMC Sec. 10-2(a).
Locations vary and are citywide.
3.3 LAND USE CERTIFICATE
Allows temporary use of private commercial property for conducting certain outdoor, short-term activities, which may be related to the onsite business pursuant to SAMC Sec. 41-195.5. This permit is originated and managed by the Planning and Building Agency (Planning Division) in conjunction with the Police Department and Orange County Fire Authority, depending on the nature of the activity proposed.
3.4 SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT
Allows temporary use of public property for conducting certain outdoor, shortterm events conducted completely or partially on City-owned or controlled public property pursuant to SAMC Sec. 10-22.
4.0 EVENT PERMIT PROCESS
This Policy assists event organizers in developing successful event plans that comply with local, state, and federal codes, laws, policies and regulations governing activities associated with the production and management of special events. The CMO or designee manages the event permit process. Various city departments, along with partner agencies may have regulatory authority related to elements in an event application and participate in the review process. This provides a coordinated approach to the planning, review, and on-site management of events. The permit process is as follows:
Exhibit 1
City Council 33 – 9 1/18/2022
3 4.1Application Submittal
Applicant completes an event permit application, site plan, traffic plan and additional supporting documentation for the corresponding department before the required deadline. Submittal of the permit application or initiation of the review process does not deem the permit application approved, nor should an event producer begin to execute their event without final written approval from the reviewing agency.
Expected attendance for events includes total participants and/or spectators, vendors, exhibitors, staffing, etc. Major Park Facility events will take precedence over moderate and minor event dates.
Table 1 - Park Facility Permit Categories
Table 1 - Park Facility Permit Categories
Expected attendance for events includes total participants and/or spectators, vendors, exhibitors, staffing, etc. Major Park Facility events will take precedence over moderate and minor event dates.
A permit application shall be submitted no earlier than 180 days for larger scale Special Events that require comprehensive event details and coordination (SMAC 10-22.2)
At the sole discretion of the City of Santa Ana, event producers may submit written amendments to the initial permit application due to unique or changing circumstances related to the event.
4.2 Application Review Process
Throughout the review process, the City may request additional information and/or documents for clarification. Delays in providing the requested information may affect the ability to complete the permit application review in a timely manner. Once the review process is completed, applicants will receive notification of the status of their application.
4.3 Pre-Event Planning Meeting
After the application approval, there is a pre-event planning meeting with the event producer. The purpose of the pre-event meeting is to discuss the event in detail, address any changes, conflicts or concerns, and troubleshoot solutions. Additional representatives of the city or partner agencies participate in the meetings as appropriate. A Post-Event Meeting may be scheduled at the request of the city or event producer.
4.4 Final Permit Application Approval
PARK FACILITY
PERMIT
CATEGORY
EXPECTED
ATTENDANCE
APPLICATION SUBMITTAL
DEADLINE
MAJOR 1,001 and Up Between ninety- (90) business days to one (1) year prior to the event date.
MODERATE 100 – 1,000 Between forty-five (45) business days and six (6) months prior to the event
MINOR date. Up to 100
Exhibit 1
City Council 33 – 10 1/18/2022
4 Final approval of the permit application includes the city receiving all requested documentation and payment prior to the event. Deadlines for requested information and final payment varies for each application. The event applicant is responsible to submit all requested documentation and payment before the agreed upon deadline.
4.5 Right To Appeal
The Right to Appeal for Park Facility Permits is pursuant to SAMC Section 31-3.3, Film Permits SAMC Section 10-5, Special Event Permits SAMC Section 10-14, and Land Use Certificates SAMC Section 41-677 provides for an appeal process for denial and revocations.
5.0 PERMIT REQUIREMENTS
5.1 EVENT SUMMARY
An event summary provides an overview of the requested event and is essential information that should be included with the permit application.
5.1.1 Admission
Includes all admission/registration/participant fee information related to the event.
5.1.2 Attendance
Providing the estimated attendance for an event helps in the review of the event plans with emphasis on public safety, venue occupancy, staffing, and impact to the surrounding neighborhood. Estimated attendance should include the total number of people anticipated to attend, participate, provide support services and/or watch the event.
5.1.3 Event Time Line
Detailed timelines are required when completing the permit application and include setup, takedown and all activity times. The time denoted on the final permit is determined by the times provided by the applicant.
Set-up and cleanup completion time should correspond with the permit and insurance documents must cover the entire length of the event.
The City may require separate permit applications for events with plans that vary significantly from day-to-day or have multiple distinct event types (e.g. a parade with a separate festival).
5.1.4 Private Property Venue
Events that utilize private commercial property for any portion of the event are required to include a signature by the private property owner on the application or submit a letter authorizing use of the property from the property owner or property manager.
5.1.5 Private events taking place on private residential property are not included in the event permit process and need to comply with the existing City of Santa Ana zoning requirements for residential property.
Exhibit 1
City Council 33 – 11 1/18/2022
5 5.1.6 Public Notification
All Park Facility Permit events require a public notification to local neighborhood associations and businesses adjacent to the park or venue. Major Park Facility Permit events require public notification thirty days prior to the event date. Minor and Moderate Park Facility Permit events notification requires fourteen days prior to the event date.
Events that include a street closure requires the event organizer to petition all residences and businesses within the enclosed street closure boundaries wherein pedestrian and vehicular ingress and egress is impacted by the special event and obtain a percentage of signatures that is deemed acceptable by the Police Chief or designee (SAMC 10-22(b)(10)).
5.1.7 Site Plan
A detailed map/site plan with the permit application is required illustrating the proposed event and includes the following: location and description of structures, placement and number of any refuse and recyclable containers, portable restrooms, fences, barricades, sound system, canopies/tents, stages, parking areas, location of all street closures and detours, etc. For runs or cycling events, routes to be followed and location of staging area from which participants will exit, information/aide booths, checkpoints, route monitor locations, spectator areas, etc. are required.
5.1.8 Business License
The City of Santa Ana requires all persons conducting business within the City to obtain a business license prior to their event. Event producers and any participating, onsite vendors or exhibitors require licenses. Current Santa Ana businesses may show proof of a current business license. Gratuitous Licenses are also available for businesses outside of Santa Ana and are good for up to one year of issuance.
5.2 Public Health
5.2.1 Food and Beverage Distribution
In accordance with the California Health and Safety Code, an Organizer permit is required when two or more food vendors are participating at a community event. If the applicant is planning to operate a Temporary Food Facility (TFF) during an event, they are required to apply, meet requirements and obtain a TFF permit prior to selling or giving away food or beverage at an event. The California Health and Safety Code requires a TFF Permit of any person or organization providing food at a community event. All food vendors, including permitted restaurants, are required to apply for and obtain a TFF Permit when participating in a community event.
5.2.2 Alcohol Sale or Service
If the sale of alcohol or public service of alcohol is included in a Park Facility Permit event, authorization from the State of California Exhibit 1
City Council 33 – 12 1/18/2022
6 Department of Alcohol Beverage Control (ABC) is required prior to the issuance of a permit. The City may place restrictions on the management of alcohol at a proposed event. Santa Ana Municipal Code Sec. 31-2.1 prohibits the consumption or possession of alcoholic beverages in a city park (SAMC 31-2.1) unless permitted through issuance of a permit (SAMC 31-3).
In the instance that a City Council approved contract permits the sale and public service of alcohol, the sale and service of alcohol may be discontinued or terminated if it is deemed to be inconsistent with the terms and conditions of permitted use (SAMC 31-2).
5.2.3 Amplified Sound
Amplified sound permits are available for events at City parks.
Amplified sound means music or speech projected or transmitted by artificial means, including, but not limited to, amplifiers, loudspeakers or any similar devices (SAMC Sec. 31-1.1). Additional restrictions may apply for any events near residential areas and/or business districts.
5.2.4 Waste Management Plan
Event organizers must arrange for provision of containers and collection of water, trash and recyclables by contacting the City’s Exclusive Waste Hauler. Recycling containers for the following materials is required for plastic, glass, metal, paper and cardboard.
The specifications of the containers, including size, type, location, and pickup/delivery times is required on the event site plan. Clean up of all trash after the event is required in all areas, and if needed, power washing of any grease or food waste contamination will be required. Event area will be subject to inspection post-event.
5.3PUBLIC SAFETY
5.3.1 Police Services
During the pre-event meeting, the SAPD will determine the type of police services needed and number of officers. Applicants are directly responsible for the cost of Police Services, unpaid services will result in rejection of future applications and the City reserves all legal rights to recoup any unpaid fees.
General factors determining # of SAPD required per event
5.3.2 Security Services
SAPD may deem an activity warrants the presence of one or more security personnel and the cost of such service shall be borne by the applicant. Licensed security personnel in uniform are required and subject to approval by the City. Proof of obtaining security personnel is due to the SAPD two weeks prior to the event.
Exhibit 1
City Council 33 – 13 1/18/2022
7 5.3.3 Fire Prevention Inspection
Events that require street closures, the assembly of 50 or more people, cooking, open flame, use of pyrotechnics or fireworks, a change of building use (i.e. a warehouse use for an assembly space), electricity or temporary membrane structures (tents or canopies), and a separate permit may be required from the Orange County Fire Authority (OCFA). As part of the permit requirements, onsite standby and inspection services may be required due to the size, complexity and/or unique safety issues regarding the activities associated with the proposed event. Inspection fees may apply.
5.3.4 Traffic Control Plan and Parking
Event producers requiring street closures and traffic modifications that pose a significant impact to vehicular traffic must have an approved traffic control plan created by a licensed and qualified traffic control company. All traffic plans are subject to final approval by the City’s Traffic Engineer and the SAPD. Events taking place in a portion of a parking lot or alley are also subject to traffic control plans by a traffic control specialist and must obtain final approval by the City’s Traffic Engineer and the Santa Ana Police Department.
In the event that water filled traffic barriers (k-rails) are required, it is the responsibility of the event producer to obtain the k-rails and a water truck capable of filling the k-rails to ensure the barriers effectiveness.
The Public Works Agency requires the use of water filled K-rail when the street or alley being closed or any of the two end of the block streets are classified larger than a residential street, per The City of Santa Ana’s Master Plan of Streets and Highways or whenever Traffic Engineering staff feel there’s the potential for a safety hazard to occur.
In the event that water filled K-rail is required, it is the applicant’s responsibility to ensure that the traffic control company is able to provide the water truck service necessary to completely fill all required water filled K-rails.
5.3.5 Stages and Other Temporary Structures
Separate building permits may be required for stages and other temporary structures such as platforms and grandstands/bleachers that measure over 5 feet 9 inches in height. Applicants shall submit the building permit applications and plans no less than one month prior to their event to allow sufficient time for review and issuance of the permit.
5.3.6 Temporary Signage Permits
SAMC Sec. 41-814 et seq. and Citywide Design Guidelines contain regulations and specifications of signs that may be located on private property within the City. Event applicants interested in installing Exhibit 1
City Council 33 – 14 1/18/2022
8 temporary signs or banners on private property are required to apply for a temporary sign permit through the Planning Division.
6.0 FEES, PAYMENTS, DEPOSITS, AND INSURANCE
6.1 Fees and Payments
The permit fees referenced in this Policy are listed in the City Council approved Miscellaneous Fees Schedule.
6.2 Deposits
Applicants must pay a deposit as listed in the City Council approved Miscellaneous Fee Schedule at the time of application. Deposits will be refunded following the event when all conditions set forth in the permit are fulfilled.
Reservation deposits are not refunded until after the final reservation and if no damage has been incurred.
6.3 Insurance and Indemnity Provisions
The City requires applicants to provide liability insurance for an event and film permit. Insurance requirements are determined based on the City’s risk assessment of the activity/event. . Insurance requirements are no less than $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury and property damage. Insurance requirements vary by the type of event, facility, and number of anticipated guests, and are subject to change without notice. Insurance requirements fulfilled prior to approval of the application and proof of insurance required 30 calendar days or more prior to the event.
7.0 RESERVATION CANCELLATIONS AND PERMIT AMENDMENTS
7.1 Permit Cancellations
Permit cancellations and refunds will be processed as follows:
All cancellations may incur a cancellation fee for each occurrence as dictated by the Miscellaneous Fee Schedule.
Failure by the applicant or authorized event contact person to arrive at a scheduled event, and/or failure to provide written cancellation notice will be considered a “No Show.” Applicants with three or more “No Shows” may lose reservation privileges and remaining reservations will be cancelled for the calendar year.
7.2 Permit Amendments
Permit amendments include, but are not limited to the following: date, time and amenities. One change permitted at no charge if requested 5 days or more prior to reservation. A Processing Fee may be charged for each subsequent change. Dependent on when request is submitted, other fees may apply for cancellations or modifications to the original reservation. No refunds or credits will be issued for early departure from an approved permit.
Exhibit 1
City Council 33 – 15 1/18/2022
9 8.0 ADDITIONAL CITY POLICIES AND AGREEMENTS
This Policy may be subject to other City Council approved policies and agreements that establish separate user reservation relationships and associated fees for specific programs and/or entities.
Exhibit 1
City Council 33 – 16 1/18/2022
LR 12.21.21
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-xx
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SANTA ANA AMENDING THE CITY’S UNIFORM
SCHEDULE OF MISCELLANEOUS FEES FOR FISCAL
YEAR 2021-2022 SPECIFIC TO PARK FACILITY
PERMITS AND FILM PERMITS
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1: The City Council hereby finds, determines and declares as follows:
A. Each year, for the convenience of the public, the City Council gathers in a single document a comprehensive listing of fees and service charges imposed by the City upon those persons seeking services of value from the City.
B. This document is known as the “Miscellaneous Fee Schedule” for Fiscal Year 2021-2022 and is on file in the Clerk of the Council office, and incorporated by this reference.
C. The Miscellaneous Fee Schedule for Fiscal Year 2021-2022 was adopted on June 1, 2021 by way of Resolution No. 2021-027.
F. On September 15, 2020, the City Council received and approved the Parks, Recreation and Community Services Agency (“PRCSA”) Service and Financial Sustainability Study that adopted new methodologies and tools for sustaining PRCSA services long term.
G. The PRCSA Cost Recovery Policy was adopted on November 17, 2020 by way of Resolution No. 2020-083.
H. The PRCSA Event Policy is presented for adoption simultaneously with this Resolution.
I. All of the aforementioned PRCSA policies and the study work together to chart the future for the PRCSA to provide recreation and community services to the City of Santa Ana.
J. The PRCSA is proposing to revise the park event permit, special event permit, film permit, and land use certificate fees to be consistent with the methodologies and tools set forth in the aforementioned policies and study. In addition, as part of proposing this amendment to the Miscellaneous Fee Schedule, PRCSA has analyzed the cost to administer Exhibit 2
City Council 33 – 17 1/18/2022
Resolution No. 2022-xx
the various programs, activities and applications for which the City imposes the attached fees or service charges.
K. The City Council finds, determines and declares that any new or increased charges, fees or service charges do not exceed the City’s estimated reasonable cost to provide pertinent service, process the specified application or administer the certain program for which the charge, fee or service charge is imposed.
Section 2: The Miscellaneous Fee Schedule for Fiscal Year 2021-2022 is hereby amended as set forth the attached Exhibit “A,” which is a summary of changes to the park facility permit fees and film permit fees. Each fee or service charge set forth in Resolution No. 2021-027 as amended shall be levied until further resolution of this Council.
Section 3. To the extent that any fee established pursuant to Resolution No. 2021-027, as amended, is inconsistent with this Resolution, such inconsistencies in Resolution No. 2021-027 are hereby repealed.
Section 4: If any charge, fee, service charge, section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or word of this Resolution is for any reason held to be invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Resolution. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed and adopted this Resolution, and each and all provisions hereof, irrespective of the fact that one or more provisions may be declared invalid.
Section 5: This Resolution shall be operative from and after the date it is adopted.
ADOPTED this _____ day of January, 2022.
_______________________
Vicente Sarmiento
Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Sonia R. Carvalho, City Attorney
By:________________________
Laura A. Rossini
Chief Assistant City Attorney
Exhibit 2
City Council 33 – 18 1/18/2022
Resolution No. 2022-xx
AYES: Councilmembers _______________________________________ NOES: Councilmembers _______________________________________ ABSTAIN: Councilmembers _______________________________________ NOT PRESENT: Councilmembers _______________________________________
CERTIFICATE OF ATTESTATION AND ORIGINALITY
I, DAISY GOMEZ, Clerk of the Council, do hereby attest to and certify the attached Resolution No. 2022-xx to be the original resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Ana on January _____, 2022.
Date: ________________ ____________________________________ Clerk of the Council
City of Santa Ana
Exhibit 2
City Council 33 – 19 1/18/2022
51301 Filming Permit Fee Per Day 492.00 0.00
Filming Permit Processing Fee-Student Per permit 79.00 0.00 Film Permit Fees
Program administered by Parks, Recreation & Community Services Group 1 City Sponsored Event -
Group 2 Resident: High School or College Student residing or attending school in Santa Ana - Non-Resident: High School or College Student not resding or attending school in Santa Ana Each 79.00 Group 3 Resident: Private Party or Business (Not-for-Profit) Per Day 246.00 Group 4 Resident: Private Party or Business for Profit Making Per Day 325.00 Group 5 Non-Resident: Private Party or Business (Not-for-Profit) Per Day 492.00 Group 6 Non-Resident: Private Party or Business for Profit Making Per Day 492.00 53308 Public Space Special Event Fee
First Event Day
Group 1 City Sponsored Event Each No Charge No charge
Group 2 Resident Non-Profit Each 832.00 0.00
Group 3 Non Resident Non-Profit Each 1,249.00 0.00
Group 4 Resident Commercial Each 1,457.00 0.00
Group 5 Non Resident Commercial Each 2,082.00 0.00
Each Additional Day
Group 1 City Sponsored Event Per Day
Group 2 Resident Non-Profit Per Day 249.00 0.00
Group 3 Non Resident Non-Profit Per Day 374.00 0.00
Group 4 Resident Commercial Per Day 437.00 0.00
Group 5 Non Resident Commercial Per Day 624.00 0.00
See SECTION I, All Departments, Building Rental Fees, for group descriptions Park Facility Permits
Minor Event (41-100 Participants) Initial Day Each Add. Day Group 1 City Sponsored Event 0.00 0.00
Group 2 Resident Non-Profit Organization Each 249.00 249.00 Group 3 Resident: Private Party or Business (Not-for-Profit) Each 249.00 249.00 Group 4 Resident: Private Party or Business for Profit Making Each 374.00 374.00 Group 5 Non-Resident: Private Party or Business (Not-for-Profit) Each 437.00 437.00 Group 6 Non-Resident: Private Party or Business for Profit Making Each 498.00 498.00 Moderate Event (101-1000 Participants) Initial Day Each Add. Day Group 1 City Sponsored Event Each
Group 2 Resident Non-Profit Organization Each 832.00 249.00 Group 3 Resident: Private Party or Business (Not-for-Profit) Each 832.00 249.00 Group 4 Resident: Private Party or Business for Profit Making Each 1,249.00 437.00 Group 5 Non-Resident: Private Party or Business (Not-for-Profit) Each 1,457.00 510.00 Group 6 Non-Resident: Private Party or Business for Profit Making Each 1,664.00 624.00 Major Event (1000+ Participants) Initial Day Each Add. Day Group 1 City Sponsored Event Each
Group 2 Resident Non-Profit Organization Each 1,249.00 437.00 Group 3 Resident: Private Party or Business (Not-for-Profit) Each 1,249.00 437.00 Group 4 Resident: Private Party or Business for Profit Making Each 1,664.00 624.00 Group 5 Non-Resident: Private Party or Business (Not-for-Profit) Each 2,082.00 832.00 Group 6 Non-Resident: Private Party or Business for Profit Making Each 2,498.00 875.00 See SECTION I, All Departments, Building Rental Fees, for group descriptions 99801001-21662 Park Facilities Deposit Per Reservation
The appropriate deposit for each facility will be determined by the Executive Director of Parks, Recreation and Community Services The appropriate deposit for each Park Facility Rental will be 50% of the overall permit cost up to $500 $100-$500 $100-500
Exhibit A
Exhibit 2
City Council 33 – 20 1/18/2022
DRAFT Minutes of the Special Meeting
of the Successor Agency of the City Council
City of Santa Ana, California
January 19, 2021
VIRTUAL MEETING
Due to Governor Gavin Newsom’s Executive Order and the City Council's Proclamation of Local Emergency, there was no inperson meeting location for the community to attend public meetings.
CALL TO ORDER
ATTENDANCE Council Members Phil Bacerra
Johnathan Ryan Hernandez
Jessie Lopez
Nelida Mendoza
Thai Viet Phan
Mayor Pro Tem David Penaloza
Mayor Vicente Sarmiento
City Manager Kristine Ridge
City Attorney Sonia R. Carvalho
Clerk of the Council Daisy Gomez
Minutes: Mayor Sarmiento called the Special Successor Agency meeting to order at 10:04 p.m.
SPECIAL OPEN MEETING
CALL TO ORDER 5:45 p.m. (Immediately following the Closed Session Meeting) PUBLIC COMMENT
Minutes: None.
CONSENT CALENDAR
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve staff recommendations on the following Consent Calendar items: Items 1 through 2.
Draft Successor Agency Minutes 1 01/19/2021
DRAFT
City Council 2 – 1 1/18/2022
Minutes: None.
CONSENT CALENDAR
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve staff recommendations on the following Consent Calendar items: Items 1 through 2.
1. Minutes from the special meeting of December 1, 2020 Recommended Action: Approve minutes.
2. Excused absences
Recommended Action: Excuse absent members.
Minutes: None.
Moved by Councilmember Bacerra, seconded by Councilmember Mendoza to Approve Consent Calendar items.
YES: 7 – Sarmiento, Penaloza, Bacerra, Mendoza, Phan, Hernandez, Lopez NO: 0
ABSTAIN: 0
ABSENT: 0
Status: 7 – 0 – 0 – 0 – Pass
**END OF CONSENT CALENDAR**
BUSINESS CALENDAR
3. Adopt a resolution approving the Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule for the period of July 1, 2021 through June 30, 2022
Recommended Action: Successor Agency Resolution No. 2021XXX – Adopt a resolution approving the Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule for the period of July 1, 2021 through June 30, 2022 pursuant to Part 1.85 of Division 24 of the California Health & Safety Code.
Moved by Mayor Pro Tem Penaloza, seconded by Councilmember Hernandez to Adopt.
YES: 7 – Sarmiento, Penaloza, Bacerra, Mendoza, Phan, Hernandez, Lopez NO: 0
ABSTAIN: 0
ABSENT: 0
Status: 7 – 0 – 0 – 0 – Pass
Minutes: Business Calendar Item Resolution No. 2021001 approved.
COMMENTS
4. City Council acting as Successor Agency comments
Draft Successor Agency Minutes 2 01/19/2021
DRAFT
City Council 2 – 2 1/18/2022
NO: 0
ABSTAIN: 0
ABSENT: 0
Status: 7 – 0 – 0 – 0 – Pass
Minutes: Business Calendar Item Resolution No. 2021001 approved.
COMMENTS
4. City Council acting as Successor Agency comments
At this time the City Council acting as Successor Agency may comment on nonagenda matters and ask questions of or give directions to staff. NO action may be taken on nonagenda items unless authorized by law.
Minutes: None
ADJOURNMENT
Minutes: Mayor Sarmiento adjourned the Special Successor Agency meeting at 10:09 p.m.
Draft Successor Agency Minutes 3 01/19/2021
DRAFT
City Council 2 – 3 1/18/2022
Successor Agency
www.santa-ana.org/cd
Item # 3
City of Santa Ana
20 Civic Center Plaza, Santa Ana, CA 92701
Staff Report
January 18, 2022
TOPIC: Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule 2022-2023 AGENDA TITLE:
Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule for the Period of July 1, 2022 through June 30, 2023
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Adopt a resolution approving the Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule for the period of July 1, 2022 through June 30, 2023 pursuant to Part 1.85 of Division 24 of the California Health & Safety Code.
DISCUSSION
The City of Santa Ana adopted an ordinance in 1973 to create a Redevelopment Agency.
Throughout the years, the Redevelopment Agency completed numerous projects to eliminate blight, spur economic growth, funded construction of affordable housing projects, and provided infrastructure and community facility improvements within the defined project areas.
Pursuant to Part 1.85 of Division 24 of the California Health & Safety Code (“Dissolution Act”), the City Council on January 9, 2012, elected for the City to act as the “Successor Agency” to the dissolved Community Redevelopment Agency (“Agency”). On February 1, 2012, in accordance with the Dissolution Act and the California Supreme Court’s decision in California Redevelopment Association v. Matosantos, Case No. S194861, the Agency was dissolved and the City began to serve as the “Successor Agency.” The City Council serves as the governing body of the Successor Agency under the Dissolution Act as amended by AB 1484, AB 471, and SB 107, to administer the enforceable obligations of the Agency and otherwise unwind the Agency’s affairs.
Effective July1, 2018, the local Oversight Board to the Successor Agency was dissolved and the new Orange Countywide Oversight Board (OCOB) was established. The OCOB now has oversight with respect to the Dissolution process, including review and approval of the Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule (ROPS).
City Council 3 – 1 1/18/2022
Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule 2022-2023
January 18, 2022
The ROPS includes the administrative cost allowance as required under Health and Safety Code Section 34177 (j) through (k), and is presented in the format designed by the Department of Finance (DOF).
Upon Successor Agency approval, the ROPS will be submitted to the Orange Countywide Oversight Board for approval at its January 25, 2022 meeting. Upon OCOB approval, the ROPS will be submitted to the DOF, County, and other appropriate entities as required by the Dissolution Act by the February 1, 2022 deadline. The ROPS will also posted on the Successor Agency’s website.
FISCAL IMPACT
The Successor Agency is limited to making only payments listed on the approved ROPS for each annual period. Administrative expenses are capped at three percent of the actual property tax distributed for the ROPS in the preceding fiscal year or the minimum of $250,000 per year. However, the OCOB has been requesting that successor agencies reduce and minimize the administrative allowance necessary to oversee the remaining obligations on the ROPS. Therefore, the Successor Agency estimates the administrative cost allowance for FY 2022-23 will be $130,000.
Funds will be budgeted for FY 22/23 in the Redevelopment Obligation Retirement Funds (account no. 67118021-various, 67018843-various) upon approval of the ROPS by DOF.
EXHIBIT(S)
1. Resolution
A. Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule 22-23
Submitted By: Steven Mendoza, Assistant City Manager
Approved By: Kristine Ridge, City Manager
City Council 3 – 2 1/18/2022
Resolution No. 2022-___
SUCCESSOR AGENCY RESOLUTION NO. 2022-__
A RESOLUTION OF THE SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE FORMER
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SANTA
ANA APPROVING THE RECOGNIZED OBLIGATION PAYMENT
SCHEDULE 22-23 FOR THE PERIOD OF JULY 1, 2022 TO JUNE 30, 2023 PURSUANT TO HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE SECTION 34177 (o), AND PART 1.85 OF DIVISION 24 OF THE CALIFORNIA HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE (“DISSOLUTION ACT”)
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MEMBERS OF THE SUCCESSOR AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA, AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The City Council of Santa Ana, acting as Successor Agency, conclusively finds, determines and declares as follows:
A. On January 9, 2012, pursuant to section 34173 of the California Health & Safety Code, the City of Santa Ana (“City”) elected to serve as the Successor Agency for the dissolved Community Redevelopment Agency (“Agency”) of the City of Santa Ana and selected the Housing Authority of the City of Santa Ana to act as “Successor Housing Agency.”
B. The City Council serves as the governing body of the Successor Agency under the Dissolution Act, as amended by AB 1484, AB 471, and SB 107, to administer the enforceable obligations of the Agency and otherwise unwind the Agency’s affairs.
C. SB 107 revised the timeline for the preparation of the required Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule (ROPS) from each six-month period to a one-year period beginning July 1, 2016.
D. The annual ROPS includes the administrative cost allowance as required under Health and Safety Code Section 34177 (j) through (k).
E. The annual ROPS for the July 1, 2022 through June 30, 2023 period must be approved by the Countywide Oversight Board and submitted to the County AuditorController, State Controller’s Office, and to the State Department of Finance (DOF) no later than February 1, 2022.
Section 2. The Successor Agency approves the Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule 22-23, attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference, and authorizes the submission to the County of Orange and Countywide Oversight Board for review and approval.
Section 3. Pursuant to the Dissolution Act, the Successor Agency further authorizes the transmittal of the ROPS 22-23, upon subsequent Countywide Oversight Board approval, to DOF EXHIBIT 1
City Council 3 – 3 1/18/2022
Resolution No. 2022-___
with copies to the County Administrative Officer, the County Auditor-Controller, and the State Controller’s Office.
Section 4. The City Manager, or his/her designee (“City Manager”), is directed to post on the City’s website the ROPS 22-23 in the manner required by law.
Section 5. The City Manager and/or the Executive Director of Community Development, or their respective designees, as delegated officials of the City acting as Successor Agency, are authorized to make or accept any augmentation, modification, additions, or revisions to the ROPS as may be necessary and appropriate in their reasonable discretion, based on review or communications from the Countywide Oversight Board, the State Department of Finance or County of Orange.
Section 6. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption by the Successor Agency, and the Clerk of the Council shall attest to and certify the vote adopting of this Resolution.
ADOPTED this _____ day of _______________, 2022.
_____________________________
Vicente Sarmiento
Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Sonia R. Carvalho, City Attorney
By:_____________________
Ryan O. Hodge
Assistant City Attorney
AYES: Councilmembers: _____________________________________ NOES: Councilmembers: _____________________________________ ABSTAIN: Councilmembers: _____________________________________ NOT PRESENT: Councilmembers: _____________________________________ City Council 3 – 4 1/18/2022
Resolution No. 2022-___
CERTIFICATION OF ATTESTATION AND ORIGINALITY
I, DAISY GOMEZ, Clerk of the Council do hereby attest to and certify the attached Resolution No. 2022-XX to be the original resolution adopted by the City Council acting as the Successor Agency to the former Community Redevelopment Agency on January ____, 2022.
Date:____________________ __________________________
Daisy Gomez
Recording Secretary
City of Santa Ana
City Council 3 – 5 1/18/2022
EXHIBIT A
City Council 3 – 6 1/18/2022
City Council 3 – 7 1/18/2022
City Council 3 – 8 1/18/2022
City Council 3 – 9 1/18/2022
City Council 3 – 10 1/18/2022
City Council 3 – 11 1/18/2022