Becerra, Alexis
From: Bob Mills <
Sent: Thursday, September 17, 2026 8: 16 PM
To: Paige C. Sirey; Happiness@lamotorsdirect. com; Albert Ramirez; mase aslan; kcalnews@cbs. com; pr@abc7. com
Cc: josh@iemotorsdirect. com; ABE@iemotorsdirect. com; Chris@iemotorsdirect. com; john@jackalopeexpress. com; Javier John Dutrey;
assemblymember. michellerodriguez@assembly. ca. gov;
citydesk@inlandnewspapers. com; opinions@inlandnewspapers. com; legals@fontanaheraldnews. com; admin@voiceofoc. org; Amezcua, Valerie; editor@newsantaana. com; kcal news @cbs. com; MAURICIO@iemotorsdirect. com; Mohammed@iemotorsdirect. com; LEEX@iemotorsdirect. com; phillip@iemotorsdirect. com; sales@american- fleet. com; sales@fontanamotorsdirect. com; sales@iemotorsdirect. com; sales@ocmotorsdirectl. com; sales@ridewayautogroup. com; [email protected]; Penaloza, David; Lopez, Jessie; Hernandez, Johnathan; Phan, Thai; Bacerra, Phil; eComment; Vazquez, Benjamin
Subject: Refuse to sign unfair agreement: Re: Claims involving Robert Mills 2022 Toyota Prius VIN ending in
Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
Aloha Albert,
9- 17- 26
As we discussed, I will not sign this unfair agreement.
Round Two.
Sincerely,
Robert Mills
PS— to the CC folks: More details available upon request.
CONTEXT: Time to Shine a Light on this injustice:
California Motors Direct ( CMD), a used car dealer in Montclair, California, sold me a vehicle that won' t pass smog, falsified a Smog Certificate, and was in a bad accident
and needs$$$$ in repairs and they will not take back the car. Others on YELP that I' ve contacted had the same experience:
getting ripped off by CMD.
100' s and 100' s of people have been ripped off by CMD and other used car dealers in Montclair, Fontana and Orange County.
The California Bureau of Automotive Repair is on the case 1 The Mayor of Montclair and the local business community are not doing anything The Mayors of Orange County and Fontana and the City Councils are not doing anything The media is not doing anything
CMD has 41 " Unanswered" complaints on the BBB
CMD has 2 official " Warning" letters from the FTC
Where are the agencies and laws protecting consumers??? Where' s Erin Brokovich when you need her??
Where are the cities that demand businesses treat their citizens and visitors fairly?? Where are the cities that allow their local businesses to rip people off?? ( Now we know and will broadcast this info) I guess we have to take it into our own hands.....
So we are taking to social media and bypassing the fake news And we are pursuing the legal route
Very sad, that in 2026, we don' t have more honesty and integrity in business..... and political leadership.
CMD tried to shut me up and buy me off for"$ 1, 200"
The damages to this vehicle are$ 10-$ 25K
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND GENERAL RELEASE
This Settlement Agreement and General Release(" Agreement") is entered into. by and between California Motors Direct(' Dealer") on the one hand, and ROBERT MILLS(" Buyer"), on the other. Dealer and Buyer are Collectively referred to as the" Parties." The Parties agree as follows:
1. On or about 4/ 29/ 2026, Buyer entered into a written contract to purchase 2022 Toyota Prins bearing VIN No.
Vehicle") from Dealer(" RISC"). Since the purchase, on or about 911312026, Buyer notified Dealer of the following concern: customer reports Intermittent warning lights and diagnostic codes and states Toyota diagnosed an issue with the vehicle' s electrical wiring harness.
2. As a compromise of this disputed claim, and as a gesture of good faith. Dealer has agreed to the following:
provide a one- time settlement payment of$ 1, 200.00 to assist with the customer' s reported electrical/ wiring harness repair.
3. As discussed in Section 2 of this Agreement, in exchange, Buyer agrees to the following: accept the$ 1, 200. 00 settlement payment as full and final resolution of the reported electrical/ wiring, harness concern and releases Dealer from further claims related to this specific concern.
4. In consideration of the above, and except as otherwise expressly provided for try this Agreement. Buyer shall release(" Dealer") California Motors Direct from any liability. Buyer covenants not to sue Dealer, and hereby releases Dealer from any and all claims arising from or out of any acts or omissions of Dealer in connection with the RISC, as well as any acts or omissions of Dealer in connection with Buyer' s purchase of the Vehicle from Dealer. Such release shall extend to Dealer's successors, agents, officers, predecessors, parent, subsidiary, attorneys, employees. assigns, and representatives. Buyer covenants to hold Dealer harmless from any and all claims arising from or out of any acts or omissions of Dealer in connection with the RISC. as well as any acts or omissions of Dealer in connection with Buyer' s purchase of the Vehicle from Dealer.
5. Buyer waives all rights under Section 1542 of the Civil Code of the State of California(" Section 1542") or any other law or statute of similar effect in any jurisdiction with respect to the claims released hereunder. Section 1542 states:
A GENERAL RELEASE DOES NOT EXTEND TO CLAIMS THAT THE CREDITOR OR RELEASING
PARTY DOES NOT KNOW OR SUSPECT TO EXIST IN HIS OR HER FAVOR AT THE TIME OF
EXECUTING THE RELEASE AND THAT, IF KNOWN BY HIM OR HER, WOULD HAVE MATERIALLY AFFECTED HIS OR HER SETTLEMENT WITH THE DEBTOR OR RELEASED PARTY.
6. Buyer acknowledges that she understands the significance and specifically assumes the risks regarding the consequences of such release and waiver of Section 1542. Buyer acknowledges and agrees that this Agreement releases all claims existing or arising prior to the execution of this Agreement which Buyer has or may have against Dealer. whether such claims are known or unknown and suspected or unsuspected by the Parties to this Agreement. Buyer forever waives all inquiries and investigations into all such claims. 2 SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND GENERAL RELEASE
This Settlement Agreement and General Release(" Agreement") is entered into, by and between California Motors Direct(" Dealer") on the one hand, and ROBERT MILLS(" Buyer"), on the other. Dealer and Buyer are collectively referred to as the" Parties." The Parties agree as follows:
1. On or about 4129/ 2026, Buyer entered into a written contract to purchase 2022 Toyota Prius hearing VIN No.
JTDKAMFUSN3151037(" Vehicle") from Dealer(" RISC"). Since the purchase, on or about 8113/ 2026, Buyer notified Dealer of the following concern: customer reports intermittent warning lights and diagnostic codes and states Toyota diagnosed an issue with the vehicle' s electrical wiring harness.
2. As a compromise of this ' -, claim, and as a gesture of good faith, Dealer has agreed to the following:
nrnui'. ef, Anne- th Se nr of Al 700. 00 to accisr with the rolt0frer' s reported electrical/ wiring Decline agreement fallowing: accept the$ 1, 200..00
g harness concern and releases
ease yroNda easa. k. dnUninethis apaeramt r
This is not a fair ag-
t I will not sign this, by[ his Agreement, Buyer shall
Is not to slip Dealer, and herebv
ssions of Dealer in connection
a ihreadandag— are totheAdobe Termsofllsr.
3uyer's purchase of the Vehicle
predecessors, parent, subsidiary,
ealer harmless from any and all
canal C^ I the RISC. as well as any acts
in Dealer.
5. Buyer waives all rights under Section 1542 of the Civil Code of the State of California(" Section I542") or any other law or statute of similar effect in any jurisdiction with respect to the claims released hereunder. Section 1542 states:
A GENERAL RELEASE DOES NOT EXTEND TO CLAIMS THAT THE CREDITOR OR RELEASING
PARTY DOES NOT KNOW OR SUSPECT TO EXIST IN HIS OR HER FAVOR AT THE TIME OF
EXECUTING THE RELEASE AND THAT, IF KNOWN BY HIM OR HER, WOULD HAVE MATERIALLY AFFECTED HIS OR HER SETTLEMENT WITH THE DEBTOR OR RELEASED PARTY.
6. Buyer acknowledges that she understands the significance and specifically assumes[ lie risks regarding the consequences of such release and waiver of Section 1542. Buyer acknowledges and agrees that this Agreement releases all claims existing or arising prior to[ lie execution of[ his Agreement which Buyer has or may have against Dealer, whether such claims are known or unknown and suspected or unsuspected by the Parties to this Agreement. Buyer forever waives all inquiries and investigations into all such claims. 3 You declined to sign HH - Robert Mills
We' ll notify all relevant parties that you declined to sign. The agreement has now been cancelled. 4 Becerra, Alexis
From: Nate Greensides <
Sent: Monday, September 21, 2026 1: 27 PM
To: ZoningCodeUpdate; eComment
Cc: Hernandez, Johnathan
Subject: Data Centers in Santa Ana
Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
Dear City Council,
Removing data centers from the list of allowed uses of land in Santa Ana ( i. e. banning data centers) may result in a possibly significant loss of future tax revenues and would send a clear message that innovation in Santa Ana is unwelcome.
I want to start first with stating that while I understand the current necessity to ban data centers in areas where there is a documented destruction of the local water supply as well as documented strain on a local electrical grid due to new data centers coming online, Santa Ana is not one of those areas. Additionally, considering a moratorium while simultaneously considering or contemplating permanent regulations is not " a waste of time" as noted by Councilmember Bacerra. To the contrary, when an elected official on the dais makes a proposal as a representative of the people, it should never be called a waste of time. I recognize that Councilmember Bacerra may not recognize constituents' worries and concerns though, given that when I met with him ( virtually) circa 2020 and two of his own constituents ( who detailed to him their own negative experiences as renters as well as some of the stories they' d heard while doing outreach to renters in their ward), he simply dismissed the experiences because he hadn' t heard about it up to that point ( even despite two people meeting with him and telling it to his face) and given the fact that he refuses to appoint a rental housing board member. But I suppose none of that is neither here nor there and now that I' ve said that, I' ll set it aside.
To Councilmember Bacerra' s point about the fact that the Council will be considering the matter of data centers as a part of the discussion about the zoning code updates, I concur with Councilmember Phan' s points which I have been thinking about on my own and was finally happy to hear an elected official say aloud: we need to be clear about the definition of" data center" ( in the legal and regulatory sense). If we are to ban a revenue producing activity by removing it from the list of allowed land uses, then we ought to make sure we are on the same page about what it means. Recent technological improvements have resulted in homeowners being able to install battery backup systems for use when grid electricity becomes too expensive. In order for these systems to work efficiently, the large batteries are connected to server like equipment for not only communication on proprietary networks, but to ensure safety for electrical workers who may be working on downed wires. Would this type of set up be classified as a data center, especially where a home owner installs batteries to run their home completely off-grid? Possibly— especially since there is no set definition in current drafts of the zoning code updates. How about an entrepreneur who believes in data sovereignty and wants to host local cloud services as an alternative to large corporations who host and house data doing god knows what with it for overseas' entities? Setting up even one small server rack might result in fines and penalties due to the absence of data centers being explicitly removed as a permissible land use in Santa Ana.
As of today, Governor Newsom has approved ( https:// www. gov. ca. gov/ 2026/ 09/ 21/ governor- newsom- signs- mostcomprehensive- data- center- laws- in- the- nation- providing- communities- more- control- on- water- electricity- and- landuse/) AB2619 ( https:// Iegiscan. com/ CA/text/ AB2619/ id/ 3457634) which will define " data center" at the state level as follows:
Business and Professions Code] 16000. 4. ( a) For purposes of this section:
1) " Data center" means a facility that houses computing infrastructure, including graphics and central processing units, servers, storage devices, networking equipment, and associated power and 1 cooling systems, for the primary purpose of processing, storing, or distributing electronic data. Types of data centers include only the following:
A) " Type I data center," also commonly known as a " hyperscale data center," means a data center with more than 10, 000 servers or a power consumption of more than 25 megawatts.
I ( B) " Type 11 data center" means a data center with a power consumption of at least 2 megawatts and no more than 25 megawatts.
C) " Type III data center" means a data center with a power consumption of less than two megawatts.
Type I data centers in Santa Ana are currently unfeasible seeing as there are simply not enough tracts of vacant land to support this type of data center, especially and particularly with the current methods of construction and equipment utilized in such a large data center. Regardless, I think this is what the vast majority of folks are thinking about currently when they talk about banning data centers. Banning this type of data center would be like banning large scale mining operations in Santa Ana - it doesn' t exist given current circumstances. Though, that isn' t to say that we should ignore it until it' s a problem, especially when we know the negative effects that mining can have on a place. To that extent, I agree that Type I data centers should be banned. However, I believe that if we are to ban Type I data centers in Santa Ana, we ought to make that explicitly clear in our local codes and laws. The smaller data centers I am less apt to ban as smaller types of data centers which could provide a stream of local tax revenue and allow for innovative businesses to come into existence within our city limits. Here are some links for consideration/ further reading:
https:// datacenternews. org/ how- much- tax- revenue- do- data- centers- bring- to- a- city/ https:// autl. assembly. ca. gov/ system/ files/ 2026- 01/ datacentersinthecityofsantaclara. pdf https:// taxfoundation. org/ research/ al I/ state/ data- centers- taxation/ The technology of the 1980s - when the current zoning code came into effect - is vastly different than the technologies we have today. Innovation has resulted in computers and daily electrical equipment using far less power than similar devices designed, engineered, and manufactured in the 1980s. 25 megawatts of electrical usage was a lot in the 1980s ( and is still a lot today) and such a data center would most definitely cause severe strain on our aging electrical infrastructure in Santa Ana. However, between 2 and 25 megawatts of electrical usage, special electrical equipment should be required if land use will be for such so as to reduce strain on the local electrical grid solar panels and batteries to provide power back into the grid during periods of high demand like in during a heatwave). For data centers which use less than 2 megawatts of electricity, should it be allowed as a land use in Santa Ana, entrepreneurial spirits may find Santa Ana to be a friendly environment in which some current residents may build a stable future and such business activity could provide a fruitful stream of business permit revenues.
To the extent that data centers could exist as a business activity in Santa Ana, allowing it would help to ensure that the city' s financial health remains intact. If you ask any economist or biologist, they will both say the same thing:
strong diversity creates systemic health. The adage of" don' t put your eggs in one basket" seems relevant here: to reduce the types of land use allowed in Santa Ana would be to further consolidate Santa Ana' s already residential dominant land even more. Healthy local economies that survive severe boom and bust cycles have a diverse range of economic activities for its residents to prosper in spite of the free market' s cycles.
To the point about innovation: I must give credit to whomever made the case for the new Al software that can be used when searching through the various articles of the draft updates to the zoning code and the recent city website domain change to " santa- ana. gov". It' s small, but noticeable to those who have been using the city' s online services and systems. This type of innovation, no matter how small, in our city, is a part of what makes Santa Ana such a great place to live and or work. If we are to regulate data centers' existence in Santa Ana, or in this case, ban via removal of approved land use cases, it behooves us to be clear about what the legal definition actually is for such. Allowing and clearly defining the tiers and types of data centers that could be allowed to exist in Santa Ana will ensure provide a stable tax revenue stream, increase economic innovation, and ensure that city residents can thrive.
Thank you and sincerely,
Nathaniel Greensides
2 Ward 5 resident
3 Becerra, Alexis
From: Gay Olivos <
Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2026 8: 33 AM
To: eComment
Subject: Re: Non Agenda Item — One Broadway Plaza / Sunshine Meeting @ Developers Bldg Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
September 15, 2026
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Attn: Mayor and City Council
Re: Non Agenda Item — One Broadway Plaza / Sunshine Meeting @ Developers Bldg Have we as a city fined Caribou Industries for " abandoned property". We are past the 20- year mark and yet we the citizens deal with the ugliness of this project which has literally sat. Why? On August 2026, the Voice of OC printed that the City of Orange is sending fines to all " abandoned" property owners. We need to take heed and do the same. This building has not produced any significant financial asset to our budget for 20 years.
Additionally, I have sent numerous complaints to our zoning department regarding the pile of dirt which far exceeds the surrounding fence and all of them have been ignored. I can only conclude that this council and Mayor have allowed this? Closed their eye or divert our attention elsewhere.
With respect to the 2nd Sunshine Meeting which is to take place this Thursday, September 17, 2026, 1 would insist that this council announces this meeting tonight. All of you have a responsibility to inform all residents of this project. Instead, this developer refuses to provide the Sunshine Meeting announcement to all residents within 2, 000 feet— he simply sends notification to the property owners and not the residents who occupy the apartments. We have over 10, 000 residents in Willard but yet the notification of the Sunshine Meetings is only dispersed to property owners— this is a bias attempt to avoid those renters from being heard.
And why did the Project Manager, Nancy Tran allow for these meetings to be held in his own building? They should be held in a public space not a personal space.
The continual disregard for us the residents must cease! I personally heard from some of you directly that this project was just a " rumor" and to be honest, I believed you. You can only imagine my thought process on what I thought or rather believed to be an honest and direct communication with this council and Mayor. Turned out to be quite different upon receiving the 2nd Sunshine Meeting Notice in the mail.
There are few moving parts, the zoning changes, the One Broadway Plaza, the continual approval of the Planning Commission allowing buildings after building to be build in our city. And for what? For whom? 1 I will be clear and transparent, I will only vote for the candidate who is going to stop this One Broadway Plaza and will advise any and all of my family, friends, associates to do the same.
Rest assured that I am closely watching who is donating to your campaigns.
Utterly disturbed,
z
Becerra, Alexis
From: Gay Olivos <
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2026 5: 10 PM
To: eComment
Subject: Non Agenda Item - One Broadway Plaza - Violation of Measure A - Sunshine Meeting Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
September 30, 2026
Attn: Mayor Amezcua
City of Santa Ana City Council
City Manager Mr. Nunez
City Attorney Ms. Carvalho
Re: One Broadway Plaza —
Subj Violation of Voter Approved " Measure A" in 2005
Sunshine Meeting of Thursday, September 17, 2026
Dear Mayor, City Council, City Manager Mr. Nunez and City Attorney Ms. Carvalho I. Measure A
In 2005, the issue regarding the approval of the 37 Story Building on 10th and Broadway Streets referred to as One Broadway Plaza went to the citizens of Santa Ana under Measure A. The citizens of Santa Ana voted in favor of allowing this 37 Story Building to proceed.
The citizens voted for Measure A with the understanding that the scope of work was to consist of the following— to name a few of the main points:
1. The building was to be occupied by business tenants with a Dunn and Bradstreet Grade of B or better
2. 50% Of the building must be leased prior to commencing any ground to break
3. Public streets surrounding this building, in particular Washington Street from Broadway to Flower was to be repaved along with other surrounding streets thus preventing us the taxpayer from repairing
4. The creation of this building was to add millions to the city budget
5. Jobs were to be created.
What we the voters agreed to were these " key" arguments / advantages from whichever viewpoint you sat on.
i
Over 20 years have since passed and as of this writing, it never came to fruition and mainly Washington Street remains in disarray. This developer has no excuse but more importantly, cannot change, decide or rather blatantly disregard what we the voters passed in 2005.
In 2020, Caribou Industries went before the Planning Commission and eventually the City of Santa Ana City council and literally without any input from us the citizens changed Measure A to their advantage. Caribou Industries significantly changed the entire project mainly from a business tenant to a residential tenant.
How can anyone change an approved measure without the approval of the citizens of Santa Ana? If any changes which directly omit the original agreed upon measure, then the voting citizens of Santa Ana must approve again these significant changes which affect us all differently. Additionally, the developer must pay for this " special election". You cannot change the rules of a voter approved measure without going back to the voters. The sitting Planning Commission in 2020 and the sitting Santa Ana Council in 2020 had no authority to change Measure A.
Therefore, I am requesting the City Attorney to look into this.
What should also be taken into consideration is that in 2020 we were in a pandemic. I was still working for AT& T and we were building mini cell sites in high school gyms in rural California and AT& T labs was diligently creating ZOOM. The entire dynamic of our business changed — the less human contact the better- and the worlds focus was saving lives— not approving a developers building.
No meetings were held on these significant changes, no Sunshine Meetings, no notification to us, no new Environmental Impact Report to just name a few. Believe me, had I received any notification regarding significant changes to this project, I would have attended regardless. There are no records that any of these checkpoints occurred.
This is why we the people lose trust in our elected officials. The 2020 Planning Commission and the 2020 City Council should have halted the changes for the One Broadway Plaza and they didn' t or refused to do so.
11. Sunshine Meeting— Thursday, September 17, 2026
I am appalled at the audacity of this developer' s 2nd Sunshine Meeting of Thursday, September 17, 2026.
Again, we the people, were not allowed to speak. Rather, they provided a small note card upon entering the building and without seeing their power point prior and which we were to fill out and ask our questions while in line to get in. What questions could one ask without seeing any presentation? Mr. Harrah was not in attendance and had a 3rd Party speak on his behalf. A few points of this meeting:
1. The 3rd party refused to answer any and all questions
2. The 3rd party limited the questions to only the changes from the 1st Sunshine Meeting to the 2nd Sunshine Meeting
2 3. The meeting was held in Mr. Harrahs building which he owns and not in a community building which we the people own.
4. The 3rd Party didn' t know the answers to many, many questions or refused to answer And/ or blatantly stated they were not going to even read the question.
5. The event was a cramped venue— they put us in a small corner with little room to stand This developer" gets away' with this because you allow it. Plain and simple.
But the most upsetting piece was that our own City of Santa Ana Project Manager Ms. Tran refused to stand up and introduce herself even when she was called. I have to wonder who Ms. Tran works for— us the citizens, the City Manager or the developer?
If she was not prepared to speak up then her presence was not necessary. I did approach her at the end and reminded her that this meeting should have been held at a community center for all of the residents affected.
I also advised her that Caribou Industries has an obligation to send any notices of any Sunshine Meeting to all residents within a 2000 feet radius which Caribou has never complied with.
Every resident in every apartment and yes we have 10, 000 residents in Willard alone should have received a notice in the mail. Sending the notices to coley the apartment manager or home owner is not what the Sunshine Ordinance states. Again, another deliberate attempt to silence the people.
Ms. Tran had no reply.
In closing, a fair and equitable Amended Measure A needs to go back to the voters for approval, and the developer must pay for this " special election"— ( note: he didn' t pay for the special Measure A election in 2005 claiming that he never received a bill from the city). It is us the people of the City of Santa Ana which must approve these significant changes and not the Planning Commission, City Council and more less the developer.
Be remembered as the team in 2026 which corrected this travesty. Be remembered as the city council who was ethical, had integrity, and did what was right for the us the people you served.
Time will tell.
Thank you,
Gay Olivos
Ward 5
p. s. And by the way, what will it take for this city to hold Caribou Industries accountable for the pile of dirt on our beautiful Broadway Street. I have yet to see that pile of dirt lowered/ removed to the height limits of its surrounding fence. I have sent numerous pictures, made numerous calls but yet the pile sits and sits and sits.
Don' t you think 20 years is enough time to " clean it up"? 3 4
Becerra, Alexis
From: Noah R <
Sent: Sunday, October 4, 2026 1: 09 PM
To: eComment
Subject: October 2026 SAPID
Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
My name is Noah Rhoades. I am a long time resident of Orange County and a private security officer. It is baffling this has become a topic of conversation. It is unacceptable and unprofessional to punch a man in handcuffs. There is a protocol to prevent these incidents at my previous company. If I or another guard even looks like I' ll punch someone, another guard will take over. People do say crazy and mean things in this profession. It is a considerable aspect of the job. A customer service worker cannot get angry and punch a customer. A mechanic cannot get angry and punch a car. A police officer cannot get angry and punch a detainee or citizen.
I am here to ask for protocols to prevent these incidents and the firing of the officer who punched the detainee. Specifically I ask officers be allowed to use their sick time for mental health and the incident prevention method I had mentioned. I will deliver this speech in person and this email. Do not side with this violent officer lest his violence be pinned on you too.
Goodbye
i