Foothills Sentry October 2020

Foothills Sentry Page 4 October 2020 velopment. The director’s assess- ment and approval of a develop- ment project would take place be- hind closed doors, with no public notice or participation. Orange residents and DRC members themselves knew noth- ing about the revisions until they appeared on the planning com- mission agenda, Aug. 24. Caught off guard, no community stake- holders provided comments to the commission. Planning commis- sioners, bolstered by two support letters from developers, approved the revised ordinance without a ripple. When the issue reached the city council, Sept. 8, DRC stake- holders were ready. The council received comment letters from the Old Towne Preservation As- sociation (OTPA), three members of the DRC, the Orange Park As- sociation and several unaffiliated citizens. Public pressure Although projects in the Old Towne historic district would remain within DRC’s review au- thority, OTPA did not fully sup- port the new ordinance. It asked that landscaping, which would be transferred to the community de- velopment director‘s discretion, be reinstated to the DRC; ob- jected to the removal of “public meeting” from the approval pro- cess; and wanted clarification on the meaning of some of the new language, specifically, “as appro- priate.” An Orange resident wondered just who was benefitting from these changes. “Developers? Builders? City staff? What bene- fit is there to residents?” he asked. Another resident noted that, “Limiting the DRC focus to Old See "Design Review" continued from page 1 Towne and historic districts clear- ly tells Orange citizens this city council does not value any other area in Orange.” “The changes don’t increase efficiency. It degrades the quality of the city,” Ann McDermott, a DRC member, submitted. “Bringing this agenda item forward during COVID-19,” the Orange Park Association pointed out, “when the public is shut out of meaningful discussion for this important issue, undermines the spirit of good governance. More- over, this is not an urgent issue.” A hitch in the get along The city council was clearly unprepared for any public push- back. Chip Monaco concentrated on the OPTA letter and wanted assurances from city staff that the association’s concerns had been addressed. He was told they had been. Kim Nichols reported that, due to a death in the family, she didn’t have a chance to “dissect the de- tails of the issue” and would wel- come additional time to talk to staff. Mike Alvarez admitted that during his due diligence he had not called any DRC members to discuss the item with them. He said he’d like the opportunity to do so and suggested the subject be continued until the next meet- ing. “There is additional informa- tion to absorb,” Mayor Mark Murphy acknowledged. He re- ferred to the “last minute” nature of the comments received and agreed that a continuance made sense. “I want to be comfort- able with the changes being made here,” he said. “Maybe some were unintentional.” “Continuance is a great idea,” Monaco agreed. The DRC will be back on the council’s Oct. 13 agenda. county that it had issued “notice that it was operating an IDEFO” on Aug. 11, and that once notice is submitted, it is authorized to operate. In a scalding Sept. 9 letter, County Counsel Massoud Shamel wrote that the facility is “anything but an IDEFO.” He noted that it “remains a disposal facility with respect to the large stockpiles of inert debris. It is the deposition of solid waste onto land, i.e., dis- posal.” It’s not what you think Shamel also found it “curious” and “contradictory” that Chan- dler/Milan would now take the position that the operation is an IDEFO and not a disposal facil- ity. If that were the case, he pos- ited, there would be no reason for Chandler/Milan to request a hearing on the merit of the permit revocation and “waste valuable government resources.” Chandler/Milan insist that the site has continuously operated since 2013, and they have “co- ordinated with public agencies.” They insist the site has been and “remains subject to inspections and oversight by the City of Or- ange.” They blame LEA for mis- directing them to pursue an Inert Debris Type 2 Disposal Facility permit, which meant they needed to be listed on the city’s Non Dis- posal Facility Element (NDFE), not necessarily the county Siting Element. County Counsel fired back, ar- guing that Chandler has not coop- erated with LEA, that the agency has yet to receive any operating records and has no idea what is actually being dumped there. He peppered his letter with such phrases as “operating in total disregard,” “continuing opera- tion without regard for law,” and “chronic pattern of noncompli- ance.” Shamel found Chandler’s claims that its status as an IDEFO negate the need for a permit or adherence to the cease and desist order to be a “material misrepre- sentation.” Too little, too late LEAdid not lead the operator to seek a city LDEF, the county re- butted, but instead “guided them to those agencies (Orange County Waste, CalRecycle) to seek assis- tance.” Further, it wasn’t until the agency got involved that Chan- dler/Milan agreed to pursue a permit. “It would have continued its unauthorized operation had the LEA not got involved,” Shamel stressed. Even if Chandler/Milan are now operating an inert debris engineering fill operation, the county asserts, that would be valid only from the date notice was filed. Everything stockpiled before that date is, LEA under- scores, waste disposal. Only “new debris” could fall under the engi- neered fill designation. Mean- while, LEA continues to inspect the site frequently and notes that it is “merely stockpiling waste.” Chandler/Milan are nonetheless sticking to the IDEFO story, ar- guing that the permit dust-up and cease and desist order are moot. They now claim that they “vol- untarily” returned the permit, and therefore “erased” CalRecycle’s designation of the operation as an inert debris disposal facility. Push back County Counsel, once again, disagreed. In a Sept. 21 letter, Shamel reminded the operators that their permit was not volun- tarily surrendered, but revoked and has nothing to do with the facility’s status. Chandler/Milan’s legal argu- ment is, Shamel wrote, “namely, let's forget that the facility was ever a disposal site, let's get along and treat the facility as IDEFO, let's let Chandler and Milan keep all the solid waste that it has stockpiled for all these months and long before any IDEFO writ- ten notification was submitted to LEA, and let's not enforce the law when it comes to Chandler/Rio Santiago and Milan.” The hearing will be Oct. 8. LEA insists its focus is the pro- tection of public health and the environment, and that, “Milan cannot take the position that they are entitled to continue their busi- ness and nothing should come in their way.” See "Dump site" continued from page 1 Tustin Area Woman’s League presented a $250 donation to Working Wardrobes, to help the organization fund career training, work force readiness, job placement assistance and professional wardrobe ser- vices to veterans, the unemployed, victims of domestic violence and the homeless. From left, are TAWL President Barbara Grider; Jerrie Rosen, founder of Working Wardrobes; and Linette Johnston, TAWC program chairman. Earlier in the year, a fire destroyed Working Ward- robes’ building and clothing inventory. Rosen reports that Working Wardrobes now has a new location. Villa Park Marine Thanksgiving came early By Carly Rabun and Samantha Frackelton When Villa Park High School students Carly Rabun ’21 and Sa- mantha Frackelton ’24 took over as chair and co-chair, respec- tively, of the event from Sammy’s older brothers, they planned to have Marine Thanksgiving 2020 be the biggest and best ever since its inception by Rick Barnett in 2002. They hoped to recruit enough local families to “adopt” over 150 Marines, transporting the servicemen and women to the city to spend Thanksgiving Day with a family. Then, COVID. Camp Pendleton will not al- low its Marines to leave base on Thanksgiving this year, so there will be no event. Carly and Sammy reached out to the Armed Services YMCA (ASYMCA), and learned that the organization was trying to obtain donations of school supplies for the Marines’ students who would be taught vir- tually. Carly and Sammy immedi- ately decided to donate half of the money remaining from last year’s Thanksgiving to the ASYMCA School Supplies for Marines ef- fort. Rotary Club of VP donated $1,000 for school supplies, other residents contributed too. The organizers delivered the donat- ed supplies to the ASYMCA at Camp Pendleton in early August. The ASYMCA had a drive-thru event to give out the supplies. Travelers along Santiago Canyon Road can’t help but notice the ironic juxtaposition of campaign signs and construction waste stockpiled with the consent of Orange City Hall. A Sept. 17 photo reveals that construction waste stockpiling continues unabated. Photo by Ken Kribel