Field Notes: Santa Ana Stakeholder Meeting - October 26, 2023

Stakeholder Meeting - Field Notes 

George Miller | October 26, 2023 | Santa Ana, California

Working Document: please add information about unnamed panelists; if not named in this brief, no name was recorded in field notes.

Presentations from:
South Coast Air Quality Management District

Orange County CUPA

City of Santa Ana Planning Department

Department of Toxic Substances Control (Zoom)

____________________________________________________________________________

Introduction & Presentations

The meeting began with representatives from GREEN-MPNA providing background on their mission and concerns about the greater Santa Ana community. A brief outline mentioned concerns related to permitted facilities in proximity to schools, their use and understanding of CalEnviroScreen, and a commitment to “getting rid of the pink,” a reference to the color designated by CalEnviroScreen indicator maps to disadvantaged neighborhoods. Panelists each had five minutes to present information about their organization. A question and answer session followed, where panelists had two minutes to answer audience questions.

Following the introduction to GREEN-MPNA, the audience, and the panelists were introduced to two key campaigns and initiatives that drive environmental justice efforts in Santa Ana: DAC-X and GroundTruth. Aiden Browne gave a brief presentation about the GroundTruth Initiative, which focused on providing a community-focused perspective on the proximity of the day-to-day lives of Santa Ana citizens to dangerous emissions from metal plating facilities.

The first of the four panelist presentations came from Santa Ana’s city planning department, focusing on their comprehensive update of their General Plan. The presentation outlined a few focus areas, which included S Main Street, Grand and 17th, W Santa Ana, and the intersection of Highway 55 and Dyer. The presenter stated that progress was contingent on the updating of the Zoning Code to maintain consistency with the General Plan. Their reasoning was twofold: first, standards needed to be updated, as their last update was in the 1960s, and second, developing zoning districts would encourage sustainable development in Santa Ana. Outside consultants from MIG will be working on this project.

The South Coast Air Quality Management District focused its presentation on permitting and notably did not use any visual tools to present. There were several topics covered in this presentation. First, South Coast AQMD outlined how they manage air quality measurements and pollution. The presenter mentioned how they regulate by conducting regular inspections, with some facilities (that use hexavalent chromium) receiving inspections four times a year - all unannounced. Second, AQMD noted the importance of public complaints and stated that they respond to every complaint.

Dr. Todd Sax from the Department of Toxic Substances Control presented over Zoom and gave a broader-scope presentation to the audience. Sax’s language was collaborative, beginning his points with statements like “we are all here to protect you” and encouraging collaboration between the community, institutions like UC Irvine, and DTSC. Dr. Sax stated throughout this introductory presentation that DTSC’s focus is facility-specific and does not consider multiple sites’ emissions simultaneously. 

The final introductory presentation was from the Orange County Health Care Agency’s Environmental Health Division (CUPA). This presentation was light on data and information compared to the other presentations, and aside from outlining the six programs they consolidate, the representative from CUPA did not have information for the audience that was not readily available from information provided by EcoGovLab.

____________________________________________________________________________

Question & Answer

After approximately thirty minutes of introduction and presentations from GREEN-MPNA and the panelists, moderator Dr. Kim Fortun opened the floor to the public to ask questions. The following text is notes from the question and answer portion of the stakeholder meeting in direct chronological order. If others have information and notes, please feel free to add: 

Abbreviations: DTSC - Dept. of Substances Control, CP - City Planning, CUPA - Orange County Health Care Agency’s Environmental Health Division, AQMD - South Coast Air Quality Mgmt. District, KF - Dr. Kim Fortun

Q:  Where can the public monitor the work [of the government organizations]?

CP:  Through the use of a recent noxious use ordinance, looking at “grandfathered” businesses as equal to those that have been permitted recently. The city of Santa Ana can act on reports from individuals, as well.

Q:  How can [the community] watch you work?

CUPA:  Public records requests can be used to access data about their work.

SCAQMD:  Referenced the F.I.N.D. Program, a way for AQMD to provide information to the public. They noted that COVID-19 delayed updates to the site but also recommended interagency efforts to address environmental justice initiatives, as well as using their community complaint line.

KF:  Reminded the panelists that this meeting is happening because these methods are not working for the public. 

DTSC:  Dr. Sax stated that the government is “unfortunately not set up to work this way.” Sax continued and noted that the relationship between GREEN-MPNA and UC Irvine is promising and has seen collaborative efforts like this work well in the past. He cited efforts like Browne’s GroundTruthing as creative and vital to drawing eyes from government organizations.

Q: Why does [the public] have to look for this information? Why give [the public] inaccessible information (not translated into Spanish)? Is there a timeline that [the public] has to report on?

DTSC:  There is a Spanish version of the DTSC website. Claim that all agencies provide information that is accessible.

CP:  Community-supported noxious use reporting information is provided to organizations, but unfortunately, there is no legislative mandate.

CUPA:  No resources for translation for online material. However, translators are brought to facilities that violate rules about chemical release.

Q: Why is CUPA hard to get a hold of?

CUPA:  “We have a duty officer on call, but there is no email to reach us at.”

Q: What do we do about health effects in the broader community? Will there be health remediation? If so, is there a timeline?

DTSC:  These health dangers can come from a variety of sources, and these sources could be as old as the 1920s. Dr. Sax noted that there are, unfortunately, no widespread programs addressing this issue. There are “statewide” conversations about addressing these issues, but there are no “easy solutions.”

Q: Are there plans to increase accessibility to public-facing information, including violation reporting in Spanish? Public records requests are insufficient and take too long to get a hold of. 

DTSC:  Translates information upon request for individual reports.

AQMD:  Currently in “discussions” to make information available in English and Spanish to offer more transparency and information to the public. Information is translated during community meetings, and advisory sessions are offered in both languages. However, this is resource-intensive and is challenging to complete.

CUPA:  Does not have the resources. 

Q: How does the sighting of multiple facilities emitting smoke near one another affect inspection and reporting?

AQMD:  Responsible for regulating individual facilities, but do not do cumulative impact reports or consider them. They “focus on individual facilities.”

DTSC/CUPA:  Collect information on facilities that are compliant with regulations. 

Q: What haven’t [individual government organizations] done successfully in regulating these chemical releases? Can you turn the lens on yourselves?

DTSC:  Dr. Sax cited past redlining policies and other racist practices to be responsible for the inequality visualized on CalEnviroScreen maps. DTSC suggested that today, environmental organizations can be sure that all current facilities follow regulations to address issues. Also noted that there should be a better link between government organizations, as well as between organizations and communities.

CUPA:  There has been a lot of improvement in the last fifteen years. 

KF - follow-up:  “How can the public see the improvement? Is there public-facing data?”

CUPA:  “There is no data for this improvement, as our record retention is only five to ten years.”

Q: Is there an action plan? (directed at all panelists)

DTSC:  We (the individual agencies) are all tasked to do specific things. These agencies do not have “the taxpayer dollars” necessary to expand their roles.

CP:  There is no statewide legislative effort to encourage collaboration between agencies. Current state law prevents these efforts and creates boundaries for collaborative efforts. 

Q: For AQMD, how often do facility inspections take place?

Link here: Field Notes: Stakeholder Meeting

Final Statement - Trevor Anderson, CalEPA

The meeting closed with a response from Trevor Anderson from CalEPA over Zoom. He recommended that through the identification of facilities that appear to be going against regulations and further collaboration between government agencies and citizens, solutions could be reached. Whether coming together in smaller groups or obtaining information regularly as a community, Anderson saw a “great opportunity” to improve the environmental concerns present in the city of Santa Ana.

____________________________________________________________________________

END OF FIELD NOTES