Not wise for Orange to leave. I first suggest council discuss our participation in the league since we re-joined in 2021 or 22. Our we present at league meetings, advocate for our policy positions with sound reasoning, and do we really want to build needed relationships with those electeds that have different views. Leaving to me sends a bad message about where Orange is and will be the future. As Councilmember Dumitru said several meetings ago, Orange is a purple 💜 city. We have to do things differently.
Dear Mayor Slater and Members of the City Council,
As a Board Member at the League of Cities, I am contacting you amidst discussions surrounding the City of Orange's considerations about renewing its membership to the League of California Cities due to our stance on Proposition 1. Cal Cities prides itself on embracing various viewpoints and fostering a platform for dialogue and growth among our member cities. In this spirit, I wish to underscore the integral role the League plays in championing the causes and concerns that resonate within our communities.
The advocacy and policy-shaping efforts of the League are grounded in a commitment to enhancing the quality of life for Californians across the state. Initiatives such as AB 2121, AB 2574, and AB 2081 exemplify our dedication to tackling pressing challenges, specifically managing and regulating sober living and substance use treatment facilities, to protect and uplift our neighborhoods. For instance, AB 2121’s emphasis on improving communication between health services and local governments, AB 2574’s focus on regulating sober living homes, and AB 2081’s push for transparency in treatment facilities all reflect our collective endeavor towards creating safer, healthier communities..
The support we extend to various legislative measures, including those mentioned above, is a testament to our broader mission: to advocate for policies that fortify municipal governance and empower cities to serve their constituents optimally. While we acknowledge the diverse opinions that Proposition 1 has stirred among our members, we must remember our shared objectives—improving public safety, enhancing health services, and fostering economic prosperity within our cities.
I appeal to the Orange City Council to weigh the comprehensive benefits that membership in the League of Cities affords. Together, we possess a formidable voice in advocating for legislative and policy reforms that cater to the multifaceted needs of our communities. Your continued involvement in the League ensures that the perspectives and interests of Orange are effectively represented, contributing to impactful changes that benefit not only your city but also others across the state.
The League of Cities is committed to addressing any concerns or propositions you may have regarding our policy positions or advocacy efforts. Our collective success hinges on our ability to collaborate and align our initiatives with the best interests of all our member cities, including Orange.
I thank you for considering continuing our partnership. By uniting our strengths and resources, we can pave the way for a brighter, more resilient future for our communities.
Respectfully,
I am writing to express my strong opposition to the consideration of the City of Orange leaving the League of Cities following the passage of Proposition 1. The recent decision by voters to pass Prop 1 should be respected, and reactionary measures like leaving the League of Cities are not in the best interest of our community.
It is essential for the City of Orange to learn from past experiences, such as the OUSD recall, where the voices of the voters were heard loud and clear. Making decisions based on knee-jerk reactions or following the lead of other cities, especially those in disarray like Huntington Beach, is not prudent governance.
The League of Cities plays a crucial role in promoting economic development and advocating for the interests of municipalities across the state. By leaving the League, we would be forfeiting our seat at the table where important decisions are made, potentially putting our city at a disadvantage.
Furthermore, the membership fees required to be part of the League of Cities are minimal compared to the potential benefits we receive, including access to valuable resources, networking opportunities, and collective advocacy efforts. Saving a small amount of money on membership fees would pale in comparison to the negative impact it would have on our constituents and our ability to effectively represent their interests.
I urge the City Council to reconsider any plans to withdraw from the League of Cities and instead focus on constructive engagement within the organization to address any concerns or challenges arising from Prop 1. Our community deserves thoughtful and strategic leadership that prioritizes their long-term interests over short-sighted reactions.
Thank you for considering my perspective on this matter.
Leaving the League over a disagreement over Prop 1 changes nothing. Prop 1 implementation moves forward. There is a claim made that there will be a cost savings, but that cost savings arises out of pettiness, a loss of access to knowledge, and sends the wrong message.
Staying in the League allows our City to influence decisions made by the League. The amount of harm, both real and perceived, is greater than the few dollars spent on membership fees. Leaving the League does not change our obligations under Prop 1 but will cut our City off from discussions and future advocacy regarding implementation of Prop 1. A more productive course of action would be to engage more with the board and management of the League to steer policy decisions to better fit our needs as a City.
Rather than taking up limited City Council meeting time with discussion about leaving the League, time is better spent closely reading Prop 1 and tightening existing development and planning standards to create Prop 1 facilities which fit into the existing developments. Issues of development standards was previously brought up regarding the massive apartment buildings off Towne and Country Dr. We need to get moving on these changes.
Not wise for Orange to leave. I first suggest council discuss our participation in the league since we re-joined in 2021 or 22. Our we present at league meetings, advocate for our policy positions with sound reasoning, and do we really want to build needed relationships with those electeds that have different views. Leaving to me sends a bad message about where Orange is and will be the future. As Councilmember Dumitru said several meetings ago, Orange is a purple 💜 city. We have to do things differently.
Dear Mayor Slater and Members of the City Council,
As a Board Member at the League of Cities, I am contacting you amidst discussions surrounding the City of Orange's considerations about renewing its membership to the League of California Cities due to our stance on Proposition 1. Cal Cities prides itself on embracing various viewpoints and fostering a platform for dialogue and growth among our member cities. In this spirit, I wish to underscore the integral role the League plays in championing the causes and concerns that resonate within our communities.
The advocacy and policy-shaping efforts of the League are grounded in a commitment to enhancing the quality of life for Californians across the state. Initiatives such as AB 2121, AB 2574, and AB 2081 exemplify our dedication to tackling pressing challenges, specifically managing and regulating sober living and substance use treatment facilities, to protect and uplift our neighborhoods. For instance, AB 2121’s emphasis on improving communication between health services and local governments, AB 2574’s focus on regulating sober living homes, and AB 2081’s push for transparency in treatment facilities all reflect our collective endeavor towards creating safer, healthier communities..
The support we extend to various legislative measures, including those mentioned above, is a testament to our broader mission: to advocate for policies that fortify municipal governance and empower cities to serve their constituents optimally. While we acknowledge the diverse opinions that Proposition 1 has stirred among our members, we must remember our shared objectives—improving public safety, enhancing health services, and fostering economic prosperity within our cities.
I appeal to the Orange City Council to weigh the comprehensive benefits that membership in the League of Cities affords. Together, we possess a formidable voice in advocating for legislative and policy reforms that cater to the multifaceted needs of our communities. Your continued involvement in the League ensures that the perspectives and interests of Orange are effectively represented, contributing to impactful changes that benefit not only your city but also others across the state.
The League of Cities is committed to addressing any concerns or propositions you may have regarding our policy positions or advocacy efforts. Our collective success hinges on our ability to collaborate and align our initiatives with the best interests of all our member cities, including Orange.
I thank you for considering continuing our partnership. By uniting our strengths and resources, we can pave the way for a brighter, more resilient future for our communities.
Respectfully,
Eric Nelson
I am writing to express my strong opposition to the consideration of the City of Orange leaving the League of Cities following the passage of Proposition 1. The recent decision by voters to pass Prop 1 should be respected, and reactionary measures like leaving the League of Cities are not in the best interest of our community.
It is essential for the City of Orange to learn from past experiences, such as the OUSD recall, where the voices of the voters were heard loud and clear. Making decisions based on knee-jerk reactions or following the lead of other cities, especially those in disarray like Huntington Beach, is not prudent governance.
The League of Cities plays a crucial role in promoting economic development and advocating for the interests of municipalities across the state. By leaving the League, we would be forfeiting our seat at the table where important decisions are made, potentially putting our city at a disadvantage.
Furthermore, the membership fees required to be part of the League of Cities are minimal compared to the potential benefits we receive, including access to valuable resources, networking opportunities, and collective advocacy efforts. Saving a small amount of money on membership fees would pale in comparison to the negative impact it would have on our constituents and our ability to effectively represent their interests.
I urge the City Council to reconsider any plans to withdraw from the League of Cities and instead focus on constructive engagement within the organization to address any concerns or challenges arising from Prop 1. Our community deserves thoughtful and strategic leadership that prioritizes their long-term interests over short-sighted reactions.
Thank you for considering my perspective on this matter.
Carla Contreras, City of Orange Resident
Leaving the League over a disagreement over Prop 1 changes nothing. Prop 1 implementation moves forward. There is a claim made that there will be a cost savings, but that cost savings arises out of pettiness, a loss of access to knowledge, and sends the wrong message.
Staying in the League allows our City to influence decisions made by the League. The amount of harm, both real and perceived, is greater than the few dollars spent on membership fees. Leaving the League does not change our obligations under Prop 1 but will cut our City off from discussions and future advocacy regarding implementation of Prop 1. A more productive course of action would be to engage more with the board and management of the League to steer policy decisions to better fit our needs as a City.
Rather than taking up limited City Council meeting time with discussion about leaving the League, time is better spent closely reading Prop 1 and tightening existing development and planning standards to create Prop 1 facilities which fit into the existing developments. Issues of development standards was previously brought up regarding the massive apartment buildings off Towne and Country Dr. We need to get moving on these changes.