Foothills Sentry January 2023

Foothills Sentry Page 4 January 2023 JOHNSON MOTORCARS 31 Years of Specializing in the Service and Repair of Mercedes-Benz Gary Johnson 714-997-2567 982 N. Batavia # B13, Orange, CA 92867 gary@johnsonmotorcars.com Village ventures Dear Editor: Regarding the proposed hous- ing at the Village at Orange: I feel for folks in the neighbor- hoods surrounding the Village. Like most homeowners, they bought there because they wanted quiet, with little traffic or crime. But housing is in short supply and is going to be built, and it’s going to be higher-density housing. The alternative to allowing housing to be built on properties like the Village is what has hap- pened on our street. Investors added ADUs (Accessory Dwell- ing Units) to two homes, and con- verted the properties into a du- plex and a triplex. There are now twelve cars, most of which park in front of the adjacent homes. Our quiet, low-traffic street will nev- er be what it was, and we dread when another “for sale” sign goes up. I would gladly trade owning a home near a high-density devel- opment for what is happening on our street. Mitch Faris Orange Dear Editor: Thank you for covering im- portant issues in our community, including the meetings held to discuss the future of the Village at Orange. We were disappointed with the beginning of your article about the Oct. 26 Revisioning Meeting. You concluded the first paragraph with “neighbors may have to accept the inevitability of high-density housing on the site.” The whole purpose of these meetings is to get input and come up with a report about the future of the property after the flawed North Tustin Street Specific Plan was canceled. You later stated “It’s complicat- ed.” That is the truth, and there is no simple answer. The purpose of the meetings is to gather feedback from all parties and to carefully study the issues. Starting your ar- ticle with “high-density housing is inevitable” is contrary to the spirit of our community, which has worked hard over many de- cades to stop bad development in our city. At the beginning of the meet- ing, it was stated that there is legislation coming from the state about housing but no one is clear how it will impact this property. Many are using that as a scare tactic to rush into approving the housing plan by the developers. Since our current state housing requirements seem to have been met, we need to know what will be expected from our city next, and how these new laws apply to more housing and this project. Most people agree that the Vil- lage needs to be revitalized to match the needs of our city and produce maximum commercial profit. People want a place to go out to dine, have interesting ex- periences, and to shop. The Vil- lage is the perfect spot for those things. The presentation by one of the developers was criticized by Councilmember Chip Monaco for not being a plan for Orange, but just things they have done at other locations. The moderators stated that keeping it a commer- cial property is good for the city and citizens. They specifically asked the developers to return with a commercial plan for the next meeting. None of that matches your con- clusion that high-density housing is inevitable. There is still much to be learned and discussed. The City of Orange is a unique and wonderful city. It has a long his- tory of fighting to keep its small town charm as it grows. We have a good general plan that clearly states how land can be developed. Developers continue to buy prop- erty and expect the zoning will change to fit their needs and prof- it margins. Citizens have stood up time and time again to fight overdevelopment. The strength and perseverance of citizens have stopped flawed plans at many sites including Ridgeline, Sully- Miller, and the Peralta School site. We do not need to accept that high-density or any housing is in- evitable. Developers need to fol- low the general plan and develop responsibly in our city. Thank you to our city council for listen- ing to citizens about their con- cerns over the Village site and for stopping the North Tustin Street Specific Plan. Thank you to all of the citizens in our city who fight to keep it a great place to live and enjoy life. We need to make sure citizens have more say than de- velopers about the future of our city. We look forward to great things happening at the Village that enrich our community at this commercial site. Margy and Jerry Costello Orange Election returns Dear Editor: I am so happy the people have spoken and elected Dan Slater as mayor of Orange. It says some- thing that he beat the incumbent mayor. Dan has already started to put in place programs to address the city’s issues. He understands the safety issues associated with the proposed Kornerstone Cem- etery behind the Yorba Dog Park, and that it is not good for the citi- zens of Orange. We look forward to his leadership. Bill Vaughter Orange Dear Editor: Congratulations to Dan Slater as the next mayor for the City … and I literally mean Mayor FOR the City. We have lived in this great city for 46 years, and have a heart for our community and what happens to it. Cities change, but it is how our leaders choose to change them is what molds our future. Dan Slater has strong ethi- cal values to move our city for- ward in a positive and productive way, holding steadfast to ALL state and local laws, while pre- serving historical values. During the campaign, you saw the “Vote for Dan Slater” signs all over the city. This spoke volumes about our city and who lives here. We want to preserve what we have, and haven’t lost sight of fighting for it. Dan Slater will carry our values through the next few years, and I know we are all grateful for that. I would also like to thank the Foothills Sentry for always be- ing the true voice of Orange and keeping us informed. Sharon Galasso Orange Ill-gotten gain? Dear Editor: Spreading 100% unfounded ageist lies is next-level uncon- scionable. Throughout doorsteps in Villa Park and Orange Park Acres, Orange Unified Trustee Kathy Moffat’s mental capacity was egregiously maligned by her opponent. Sadly, Madison Miner reveals more about her own integrity. These campaign tactics also con- firm what we know regarding the integrity and character of Miner’s financial backers (Jeff Barke, Mark Bucher, Tim Surridge) and the supporters who carried these lies, canvassing door-to-door and online. Kathy Moffat’s record speaks clearly for itself. Regardless of political "sides," Trustee Mof- fat is revered as a person who leads with respect, kindness, and HONESTY. This sentiment has been apparent in the outpouring of appreciation expressed by the community, her colleagues and by other elected city, county and state officials this past month. There is truly no one better at the work of school board trustee than Kathy. There is no one more wholly qualified, more genuine, more passionate or more fully engaged. What an honor to have had Trustee Moffat on our team - the team of every student, parent, teacher, fellow trustee and staff member of OUSD. She leaves this place better than she found it. We whole-heartedly extend our gratitude for her honorable service and representation. Thank you, Madam Trustee. Stacey Kirschner Meis Orange Dear Editor: I am saddened by the unethical defeat of Kathy Moffat for OUSD School Board Trustee by Madi- son Miner. Moffat lost by approx- imately 200 votes, and graciously accepted the results, because she is a woman of great integrity. The same cannot be said for her opponent, who used just about every dirty trick in the book to win. Here are just a few of the un- ethical moves made by Miner and her election team: *Canvassed neighborhoods, in- cluding Villa Park, East Orange, and OPA, telling voters that Mof- fat has dementia (she does not); that OUSD is using graphic sexu- al materials in elementary schools (there is no sex ed curriculum until middle school); and that OUSD is teaching Critical Race Theory (CRT) (they are not). *Stood outside elementary schools at the end of the school day, handing out flyers and re- peating claims about sex ed and CRT. *Was endorsed from the pulpit at her request, during a televised service, with her Pastor Jack Hibbs telling his congregation to vote for her. Not only is this un- ethical, but illegal, per the IRS. *Sent out multiple mailers claiming she was a “real educa- tor.” She is not, and never has been. *Lied on her website, saying she was a speech language pa- thologist, which requires, at mini- mum, a master’s degree; in fact, she was a speech language aide, which only requires an AA. (She changed her website after being publicly confronted.) *Claimed to be a substitute teacher, but when pressed would only say “I go wherever they need me.” Requests to local districts show she only subbed was at OCCA, the religious-based char- ter school in Orange, sometime after April 2022. Her endorsers include: Jack Hibbs – Anti-evolution, anti-LGBTQ pastor of Calvary Chapel, Chino Hills Crystal Miles - VP City Coun- cilmember who has posted anti- LGBTQ sentiments on social media Brenda Lebsack - Anti-public education, anti-LGBTQ, pro-con- version therapy activist Mary Barke – Pro-religious charter school, anti-ethnic stud- ies OC Department of Education boardmember Leandra Blades – Placentia- Yorba Linda school board trustee who attended the Jan. 6 insurrec- tion and opposes ethnic studies. Jeff Barke – Doctor banned by Hoag Hospital, founding member of America’s Frontline Doctors, an extremist group which spread lies about COVID, masks, and vaccines. Founding board mem- ber of OCCA. Michelle Weisenberg Orange Dumping ground Dear Editor: Waterfalls, beautiful trees, small running waterways and foliage, with birds and small ani- mals in our own backyard. This is a precious piece of property, known as the Chandler site. When viewed from above, the magical sight takes your breath away. This area is being threatened by OC Reclamation, LLC and Chan- dler's Sand and Gravel, LLC (col- lectively known as The Discharg- ers). They're proposing to fill in the former sand and gravel excava- tion quarry located at 5341 E. Santiago Canyon Road. The site will be used as an Inert Waste Disposal Unit for receipt of ex- clusively "inert waste." It will then be graded to match the el- evation of adjacent parcels. (FYI, Inert Waste is sand and concrete, just like the mounds down the street.) Why would the Regional Wa- ter Board allow this? Nature has already perfectly reclaimed this piece of land. Join me in ask- ing this agency to reject this di- sastrous proposal. The Regional Water Board has the power to say NO. Submit comments by Jan. 10. The timing is in the busiest time of the year, but email Claudia. Tenorio@WaterBoards.ca.gov . Mari Nori Orange Dear Editor: On Feb. 3, the Santa Ana Re- gional Water Quality Board will hold a hearing regarding the pro- posed OC Reclamation Waste Disposal Operation at 5341 E. Santiago Canyon Road in Or- ange. The applicant, known to the community as Chandler, hopes to turn the wetland, with endan- gered species, into a dump. This would result in a dump right next to Santiago Creek and destroy one of the few existing wetlands still in Orange County. The per- mit would allow Chandler to fill in this area, already restored by nature, with inert waste. This same company also partnered with Milan Capital and illegally dumped their version of inert waste for years, undocumented and unchecked, into huge piles on the former Sully-Miller site. Before Milan destroyed it, it was a flat area brimming with green- ery and wild animals, and pleas- ant to look at. It is now contami- nated with huge mounds of rock and debris. The City of Orange, under the former administration, allowed this unregulated dump- ing without a valid permit. Not one load was documented or in- spected before it was plowed into the mounds seen today. Thankfully, an observant citi- zen contacted the Local Enforce- ment Agency, and Milan/Chan- dler was shut down. Further in- spections turned up old pool tiles