Protect Our Homes And Hills vs. County of OrangeResponseCal. Super. - 4th Dist.July 2, 2015OF FI CE OF TH E C O U N T Y C O U N S E L C O U N T Y OF O R A N G E OO 0 NN A Wn A W N N O N O N O N N N O N O N O N O N mm m m e m e m mm p m p m mt pe d C0 NN AN a R W N = Oo NO 0 N N N B W ND = O LEON J. PAGE, COUNTY COUNSEL NICOLE M. WALSH,. SENIOR DEPUTY (SBN 248222) JULIA C. WOO, DEPUTY (SBN 243325) 333 W. Santa Ana Blvd., Suite 407 Santa Ana, California 92701 Telephone: (714) 834-6257 Facsimile: (714) 834-2359 nicole.walsh@coco.ocgov.com julia.woo@coco.ocgov.com ELECTRONICALLY FILED Superior Court of California, County of Orange 08/28/2017 at 02:32:00 PM Clerk of the Superior Court By Olga Lopez, Deputy Clerk Attorneys for Respondents, County of Orange, and Orange County Board of Supervisors Exempt From Filing Fees Pursuant to Gov’t Code § 6103 SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ORANGE, CIVIL COMPLEX CENTER PROTECT OUR HOMES AND HILLS; HILLS FOR EVERYONE; ENDANGERED HABITATS LEAGUE, INC.; CALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETY; FRIENDS OF HARBORS, BEACHES AND PARKS, INC,, Petitioners and Plaintiffs, Vv. COUNTY OF ORANGE; BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF COUNTY OF ORANGE; CITY OF YORBA LINDA; CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF YORBA LINDA; and DOES 1 through 20, inclusive, Respondents and Defendants. YORBA LINDA ESTATES, LLC, an Arizona Limited Liability Company and a California Limited Liability Corporation; and DOES 21 through 50, Real Parties in Interest. Case No. 30-2015-00797300-CU-TT-CXC ASSIGNED FOR ALL PURPOSES TO: JUDGE WILLIAM D. CLASTER, CX-102 COUNTY OF ORANGE RESPONSE TO PETITIONERS’ OBJECTIONS TO THE SUPPLEMENT TO THE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD Return to Writ Hearing Date: September 8, 2017 Hearing Time: 1:30 p.m. Dept.: CX-102 PETITION FILED: 07/02/2015 JUDGMENT DATE: 08/24/2016 The County of Orange and Orange County Board of Supervisors (collectively, “County’) respectfully submit the following response to the Petitioners’ Objections to the Supplement to the Administrative Record. /l ws | COUNTY OF ORANGE RESPONSE TO PETITIONERS’ OBJECTIONS TO THE SUPPLEMENT TO THE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD OF FI CE OF TH E C O U N T Y C O U N S E L C O U N T Y OF O R A N G E OO 0 3 O N Wn R V D N O N O N N N N N O N N O N mm e m r t dt p d p t p m p m p m CO NN O N Ln bh W N = OO DO 0 N N N N h l W Y = O THE SUPPLEMENT TO THE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD IS COMPLETE On August 2, 2017, Petitioners submitted Objections to the Supplement to the Administrative Record (Register of Actions or ROA No. 521) along with their response to the County’s Return to the Writ of Mandate (ROA No. 520), for the August 11 hearing on the Return to the Writ of Mandate. The objections described approximately 10 alleged omissions from the Supplement to the Record. On August 8, the Court continued the hearing from August 11, to September 8, 2017. On August 17, the County received a letter from Petitioners regarding an additional approximately 60 alleged omissions from the Supplement to the Record. (A true and correct copy of that correspondence is attached hereto as Exhibit A.) In the interest of resolving all alleged omissions without additional delay, the County addresses them in total here. The Supplement to the Administrative Record contained all documents required by Public Resources Code section 21167.6, subdivision (€). Petitioners requested, in their objections and subsequent correspondence, that drafts of various documents never released for public review (not required to be in the record under Public Resources Code section 21167.6(e)(10)), attorney-client privileged communications and/or protected work product, and repetitive/duplicative information, be added to the record. In addition, Petitioners alleged “omissions” that are not actually “omissions” from the record at all. Instead, Petitioners failed to exercise reasonable diligence in searching the record for the documents they believed were omitted, which were comprised mostly of email attachments that are in the record in the earlier strings of a particular email. The County compiled the table attached hereto as Exhibit B responding to each and every one of Petitioners’ alleged objections to the Supplement to the Administrative Record. This response was sent to Petitioners via email on August 23, 2017, in addition to a response provided via email to Petitioners on August 11, 2011 following the filing of their Objections to the Supplement to the Administrative Record. The County does not concede that any of the draft documents omitted from the record are properly part of the administrative record or are otherwise relevant to the Board of Supervisors’ decision on the project approval following issuance of the writ by this Court. However, in the -2- COUNTY OF ORANGE RESPONSE TO PETITIONERS’ OBJECTIONS TO THE SUPPLEMENT TO THE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD OF FI CE OF TH E C O U N T Y C O U N S E L C O U N T Y OF O R A N G E OW 0 2 O N hn HH Ww N = N O N N O N N O N O N N N m m mm e m e m p m mt e d b d je m fe d 00 NN N AN Ln BA W N = O WO N N R W N = O interest of compromise and to expeditiously move this case forward, the County did provide 14 additional documents (one of which was in the original Index, but was inadvertently omitted from the flash drive containing the Supplement to the Administrative Record (see ROA Nos. 517-18), and others that were also already in the record in some form (e.g., in an email chain) but are being provided as separate documents) to the Petitioners, and the County lodges concurrently herewith a flash drive containing the Addendum to the Supplement (with index), along with an updated Supplement to the Record (with updated index), containing these files. The County maintains the attorney-client privilege and/or attorney-work product doctrine are applicable to some of the documents requested by Petitioners. (See Exhibit B.) DATED: August 28, 2017 Respectfully submitted, LEON J. PAGE, COUNTY COUNSEL NICOLE M. WALSH, SENIOR DEPUTY JULIA C. WOO, DEPUT le M. Walsh, Senior Deputy Attorneys for County of Orange, and Orange Countv Board of Supervisors 3. COUNTY OF ORANGE RESPONSE TO PETITIONERS’ OBJECTIONS TO THE SUPPLEMENT TO THE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD EXHIBIT A KEVIN K. JOHNSON, APLC A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION KEVIN K. JOHNSON ATTORNEYS AT LAW TELEPHONE (619) 696-6211 JEANNE L MackINNON 703 PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD, SUITE 210 HEIDI E. BROWN +) CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92011 FAX (13nd 7010 August 17, 2017 SENT VIA EMAIL Nicole Walsh Senior Deputy County Counsel 333 West Santa Ana Blvd., Suite 407 Santa Ana, CA 92701-1379 Nicole. Walsh@coco.ocgov.com Re: Protect Our Homes and Hills et al. v. County of Orange et al. Case Nos. 30-2015-00797300 and 30-2017-00925277 Supplemental Administrative Record Dear Nicole: As indicated in my previous emails to you, Petitioners have reviewed the Supplemental Administrative Record (“SAR”) prepared in connection with the return to the Court's writ in Case No. 00797300. As partially identified in our previously filed Objections and as more fully detailed below, we have found serious omissions in the SAR relating primarily to missing attachments to emails. We request that the County review the omissions identified herein and kindly respond with an explanation whether: (1) the document in question is located somewhere else in the record and, if so, where; or (2) the document was withheld on the basis of privilege with identification of the specific privilege(s) asserted. As I previously indicated, our intent is to assure a complete record in both the return to the writ proceedings and the 2017 actions brought by Petitioners herein and NCBRS. At present, given the numerous omissions in the SAR, we cannot be assured that the SAR is an adequate record for either purpose. We appreciate your assistance and cooperation in this matter. August 17,2017 Upon receipt of your response as requested, we will be in a better position to assess the validity of the privileges asserted under California Oak Foundation v. County of Tehama and Citizens for Ceres v. Superior Court as well as the relevancy of the documents omitted and propriety of their inclusion in or exclusion from the record under Public Resources Code section 21167.6. SAR Documents Which Reference But Do Not Include Attachments: D45, G59, G65, G71, G106, G153, G187, G196, G210, G218, G220, G224, G230, G260, G270, G276, G316 (refers to attachments but unclear whether attachment content is contained in email), G325, G349, G353, G378, G387, G392, G402, G410, G420, G434, G438, G485, G509, G524, G525, G526, G527, G540, G550, G552, G557, G562, G572 (in addition to missing the attachment, this email indicates it is 1 of 3, it is followed by G573 which indicates it is 2 of 3 but there is no subsequent email identified as 3 of 3 in the record), G592, G593, G595, G597, G598, G600, G616, G635, G650, G654, G657, G680, G683, G684, G685, G729. SAR Documents Which Reference Emails or Other Communications Not Included in SAR: G118, G179, G601. SAR Documents Which Include Inoperable Links: G66, G596, G743. SAR Documents Which Reference Other Versions of Record Documents: G66 - references versions of Specific Plan; G76 - references 9.22 version of MMRP; G76; G103; G125 - references Doug Wymore's redlines to Subdivision Committee Staff Report; G179 - references Nicole Walsh edits to Substantial Conformance Memorandum. SAR Documents Which Are Incomplete: F1-F15 - includes an incomplete assortment of litigation records related to Case No. 00797300; on what basis was the decision made to include some case records, but not others? SAR Documents Referenced in Index But Not On Flash Drive: G771. SAR Index Errors: G529 and G529A, G765, G766 are incorrectly identified. SAR Documents Not Properly Part of the SAR: D41 (additional references) - it is unclear how these fit within the categories outlined in Pub. Res. Code §21167.6, how they were used in the writ compliance effort, by whom, for what purpose; D49 p. 13637 is not related to this matter; G13 does not appear related to this matter. Given the upcoming hearing on the return to the writ as well as our record preparation efforts in the 2017 actions, we would appreciate a prompt response to this letter. Again, thank you for your 2 August 17,2017 ongoing cooperation and assistance in assuring an adequate and complete administrative record in the Esperanza Hills litigation matters. Very truly yours, KEVIN K. JOHNSON, APLC it ‘Jeanne L. MacKifinon cc: Christopher Garrett (via email) Taiga Takahashi (via email) Navi Dhillon (via email) Michael Steele (via email) Andrea McAfee (via email) EXHIBIT B Obj. | SAR Doc. | Petitioners' Objections Response No. | No. 1 D41 Itis unclear how these fit within This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. the categories outlined in Pub. These documents were submitted to the Board in connection with Res. Code §21167.6, how they the Board's December 2016 meeting, as indicated on the index, and were used in the writ compliance | are therefore properly part of the record under PRC 21167.6. This effort, by whom, for what document was provided in connection with the letter that appears purpose; at D39. In addition, this document was also referenced in the original GHG analysis, specifically D41/12515, for example, refers to the 23.9% emission reductions from state regulations and AB 32 measures, which the Court determined was appropriate in its Statement of Decision. 2 D45 SAR Documents Which Reference | This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. The But Do Not Include Attachments attachment referred to in this document is already included in the record as part of Doc. D14-17/10418-29. 3 DA49, Is not related to this matter This document appears to have inadvertently been included, since 13637 it was submitted in connection with the Board's December 2016 meeting. This is an inadvertent inclusion, probably because it was in the Clerk of the Board file. 4 F1-F15 Includes an incomplete This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. The assortment of litigation records Board's meetings regarding the Project in the latter half of 2016 related to Case No. 00797300; on | and in 2017 were in connection with complying with the Court's what basis was the decision made | writissued in Case No. 797300. to include some case records, but not others? 5 G10/ See Petitioners (POHH) August 2, This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. 19369 2017 objections: Draft of GHG This document is not relevant, given that the final version of this corrections document is already included in the record, as well as other drafts. It is not required to be included under PRC 21167.6. Nonetheless, this document was provided to you on August 11, 2017. 6 G13 Does not appear related to this This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. This matter document shows that the Planning Commission discussed matters involving the Esperanza Hills litigation at its July 2016 meeting. 7 G25/ See Petitioners (POHH) August 2, | This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. 19513 2017 objections: August 9, 2016 This document is not relevant, given that the final version of this email sent by CAA Planning to document is already included in the record, as well as other drafts. Robyn Uptegraff, Assistant It is not required to be included under PRC 21167.6. Nonetheless, Director of Public Works at this document was provided to you on August 11, 2017. County, re updated GHG analysis 8 G34-37/ See Petitioners (POHH) August 2, This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. 19647 2017 objections: emails that These documents do not indicate any document that was reference MMRP documents improperly omitted from the record. A draft of the MMRP is related to GHG mitigation provided in Doc. G34. 9 G59 SAR Documents Which Reference | This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. This But Do Not Include Attachments document is an email that does not have an attachment. This document refers to a September 2016 revision to the proposed specific plan. The relevant drafts or versions of the Specific Plan required to be included in the record under PRC 21167.6 have been included in the record. For example, a redline is at D14-13, a blackline at D14-14, and another blackline at D35-10. Obj. | SAR Doc. | Petitioners’ Objections Response No. | No. 10 | G65 SAR Documents Which Reference | This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. But Do Not Include Attachments This document refers to G57 and G39. 11 | G66 SAR Documents Which Include This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. This Inoperable Links; references is an internal link within County servers and not meant for external versions of Specific Plan users or access. This document refers to a September 2016 revision to the proposed specific plan. The relevant drafts or versions of the Specific Plan required to be included in the record under PRC 21167.6 have been included in the record, including for example at D14-13, D14-14, D35-10, D69-5, D79-7, and H1. 12 | G71 SAR Documents Which Reference | This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. The But Do Not Include Attachments attachment referenced here is already included in G38, and the email is included in G71. PRC 21167.6 requires the inclusion of relevant documents and does not require the record to include duplicative documents. Nonetheless, the original email and attachment in G71 is being provided to you. 13 | G76 References 9.22 version of This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. MMRP; Relevant versions of the MMRP, including drafts, are already see also Petitioners (POHH) included in the record (e.g., G34, G35, G37, D14-8, D14-9). August 2, 2017 objections. 14 | G103 SAR Documents Which Reference | This objection is invalid. This document refers to a staff report, Other Versions of Record which is included within G103. Documents 15 | G106 SAR Documents Which Reference | This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. But Do Not Include Attachments There were no email attachments, just a link to a publicly accessible website. Staff reports for the October 26, 2016 Planning Commission meeting are already included in the record, for example at D14 and D14-1 through D14-17. 16 | G118 SAR Documents Which Reference | This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. Emails or Other Communications There are no email attachments. Not Included in SAR 17 | G125 References Doug Wymore's This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. redlines to Subdivision Committee | This document refers to redlines provided by Doug Wymore Staff Report regarding the Subdivision Committee Staff Report, the relevant versions of which have been provided elsewhere in the record, for example at G120, G121, and G122. 18 | G153 SAR Documents Which Reference | This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. This But Do Not Include Attachments document isin G152. 19 | G179 SAR Documents Which Reference | This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. Emails or Other Communications | The documents referenced in G179 appear to relate to privileged Not Included in SAR; Nicole Walsh | and/or protected information and there was no attachment. edits to Substantial Conformance Memorandum 20 | G187 SAR Documents Which Reference | This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. But Do Not Include Attachments This document refers to the agenda staff report and its attachments, the relevant versions or drafts of which required to be included in the record under PRC 21167.6 have been included in the record, for example at D14 and D14-1 through D14-17. And the top-line email does not have an attachment. "Obl. | SAR Doc, | Response 21 SAR Documents Which Reference | This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. But Do Not Include Attachments This document refers to G195. G195 and its attachment are included in the record. But Do Not Include Attachments 22 | G210 SAR Documents Which Reference | This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. But Do Not Include Attachments This document refers to attachments for the staff report for the Nov. 16, 2016 subdivision committee meeting, which are included in the record. See email at G211 for attachments. Also, see D14 and D14-1 through D14-17 and/or the staff report for the Subdivision Committee, which is included at D24. 23 | G218 SAR Documents Which Reference | This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. But Do Not Include Attachments This document refers to attachments for the staff report for the Nov. 16, 2016 subdivision committee meeting, which are included in the record. See email at G221 for attachments. Also, see D14 and D14-1 through D14-17 and/or the staff report for the Nov. 16, 2016 Subdivision Committee meeting, which is included at D24. 24 | G220 SAR Documents Which Reference | This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. But Do Not Include Attachments This document refers to attachments for the staff report for the Nov. 16, 2016 subdivision committee meeting, which are included in the record. See email at G221 for attachments. See also D24. 25 | G224 SAR Documents Which Reference | This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. But Do Not Include Attachments This document refers to attachments for the staff report for the Nov. 16, 2016 subdivision committee meeting, which are included in the record at D24. 26 | G230 SAR Documents Which Reference | This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. But Do Not Include Attachments This document refers to G227. 27 | G260 SAR Documents Which Reference | This objection is invalid. This document refers to a document But Do Not Include Attachments already included in the record in Doc. E1296 of the original record. The content of this document is also included in the email chain in Doc. G260. 28 | G270 SAR Documents Which Reference | This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. But Do Not Include Attachments This document refers to G267. 29 | G276 SAR Documents Which Reference | This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. But Do Not Include Attachments This document refers to G262. 30 | G316 Refers to attachments but unclear | This objection is invalid. The attachment referred to in the email is whether attachment content is included within the document. contained in email 31 | G325 SAR Documents Which Reference | This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. But Do Not Include Attachments This document refers to G322. 32 | G3as SAR Documents Which Reference | This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. It But Do Not Include Attachments refers to emails within the chain on the document itself. This document refers to D59/14418-19. 33 | G353 SAR Documents Which Reference | This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. But Do Not Include Attachments This document refers to D58 and G352. 34 | G378 SAR Documents Which Reference | This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. This document refers to G377. c. -| ‘Petitioners’ Objections. pj SAR Documents Which Reference But Do Not Include Attachments This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. This document refers to a draft (c. Feb. 2, 2017) additional environmental analysis, the relevant versions of which have been provided elsewhere in the record. That said, the documentis being provided to you now. 36 | G389/ See Petitioners (POHH) August 2, | This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. 24282 2017 objections: A forwarded This document is not relevant, given that the final version of this email from CAA of an updated document is already included in the record, as well as other drafts. AEA memo on February 7, 2017 Itis not required to be included under PRC 21167.6. Nonetheless, this document was provided to you on August 11, 2017. 37 | G389/ See Petitioners (POHH) August 2, | This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. 24282 2017 objections: Email from CAA This document is not relevant, given that the final version of this on February 6, 2017, re an document is already included in the record, as well as other drafts. updated AEA memo It is not required to be included under PRC 21167.6. Nonetheless, this document was provided to you on August 11, 2017. 38 | G392 SAR Documents Which Reference | This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. But Do Not Include Attachments This document refers to G350. 39 | G398/ See Petitioners (POHH) August 2, | This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. 24442 2017 objections: Feb. 10, 2017 This document is not relevant, but only refers to internal YLE draft of the additional communications and there is no attachment. The final version of environmental assessment to this document is already included in the record, as well as previous County staff members and drafts including D35-9, D69-3, and D79-6. This document is not request to County for review of required to be included under PRC 21167.6. Nonetheless, this document document was provided to you on August 11, 2017. 40 °| G402 SAR Documents Which Reference | This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. But Do Not Include Attachments This document refers to redlines of the additional environmental analysis (see G398), the relevant versions of which have been provided elsewhere in the record. Nonetheless, this document was provided to you on August 11, 2017. 41 | G410 SAR Documents Which Reference | This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. But Do Not Include Attachments This document refers to G409. 42 | G420 SAR Documents Which Reference | This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. But Do Not Include Attachments The documents referenced in G420 appear to relate to privileged and/or protected information. 43 | G434 SAR Documents Which Reference | This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. But Do Not Include Attachments This document refers to attachments to the staff report for the March 2017 Planning Commission hearing, which have been provided in the record for example at D69-2, D69-4 and D69-10. That said, these documents are being provided now. 44 | G438 SAR Documents Which Reference | This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. But Do Not Include Attachments This document refers to G437. 45 | G485 SAR Documents Which Reference | This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. But Do Not Include Attachments This document refers to G483. | Petitioners’ Objections. | Response SAR Documents Which Reference But Do Not Include Attachments This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. This document refers to minor corrections to attachments to the staff report for the March 2017 Planning Commission hearing. These corrections are described in the email. The final versions of these documents have been provided in the record. See attachments at G510. 47 | G524 SAR Documents Which Reference | This objection is invalid. The attachment to this email is included But Do Not Include Attachments within the document. 48 | G525 SAR Documents Which Reference | This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. But Do Not Include Attachments This document refers to G524. 49 | G526 SAR Documents Which Reference | This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. But Do Not Include Attachments This document refers to G522. 50 | G527 SAR Documents Which Reference | This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. But Do Not Include Attachments This document refers to G516. 51 | G529 Incorrectly identified Noted; G529 and G529A were inadvertently switched. The index will be corrected. 52 | G529A Incorrectly identified Noted; G529 and G529A were inadvertently switched. The index will be corrected. 53 | G540 SAR Documents Which Reference | This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. But Do Not Include Attachments This document refers to G539. 54 | G550 SAR Documents Which Reference | This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. But Do Not Include Attachments This document refers to G547. 55 | G552 SAR Documents Which Reference | This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. This But Do Not Include Attachments document refers to G539. See also previous letters from Diane Kanne, which are included at D49, D69-9 and G310. 56 | GSS7 SAR Documents Which Reference | This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. But Do Not Include Attachments This document refers to G554. 57 | G562 SAR Documents Which Reference | This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. But Do Not Include Attachments This document refers to G547 and G561. 58 | G572 SAR Documents Which Reference | This objection is invalid. The attachment to G572 is available by But Do Not Include Attachments; | hyperlink. Otherwise this objection does not demonstrate a in addition to missing the deficiency in the record. Notwithstanding the subject lines in G572 attachment this email indicates it | and G573 the County is unable to locate a related email with the is 1 of 3; itis followed by G573 subject line "PRA 3 of 3" on March 30, 2017. which indicates it is 2 of 3 but there is no subsequent email identified as 3 of 3 in the record 59 | G592 SAR Documents Which Reference | This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. It But Do Not Include Attachments refers to the public notice for the December 13, 2016 BOS hearing which is at D28 and the public notice for the May 9, 2017 BOS hearing which is at D74A. See also G608. Petitioners’ Objections = | Response - SAR Documents Which Reference But Do Not Include Attachments This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. This refers to the final version of Resolution No. 17-01, which is included in the record, for example at D79-3. 61 | G595 SAR Documents Which Reference | This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. The But Do Not Include Attachments VTTM with topo lines is included in the record at G537/26282-88 and D79-12. That said, this document is being provided to you now. 62 | G596 SAR Documents Which Include This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. Inoperable Links This refers to a version of the Specific Plan shared via a third-party file sharing website link that is no longer operating. The relevant drafts or versions of the Specific Plan required to be included in the record under PRC 21167.6 have been included in the record, for example at D69-5 and D79-7. 63 | G597 SAR Documents Which Reference | This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. But Do Not include Attachments This document refers to redlines of the potential approval resolutions sent to County Counsel for review, the relevant, nonprivileged and/or nonprotected versions of which have been provided elsewhere in the record, for example at D79-3, D79-9, D79-10, D79-11 and D79-13. The original email (but not attachments) is being provided to you, even though it is not relevant for purposes of the record, as the content is already included in G597. 64 | G598 SAR Documents Which Reference | This objection does not demenstrate a deficiency in the record. But Do Not Include Attachments This document refers to redlines of the potential approval resolutions, the relevant versions of which have been provided elsewhere in the record for example at D79-3, D79-9, D79-10, D79- 11 and D79-13. See also G597. 65 | G600 SAR Documents Which Reference | This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. But Do Not Include Attachments The documents referenced in G600 relate to privileged and/or protected information. The final staff report is included at D79. 66 | G601 SAR Documents Which Reference | This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. Emails or Other Communications | The documents referenced in G600 appear to relate to privileged Not Included in SAR; see also and/or protected information. The final staff report is included at Petitioners (POHH) August 2, 2017 | D79. objections. 67 | G616 SAR Documents Which Reference | This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. But Do Not Include Attachments See G600. Also, the Esperanza Hills redline of Section 13.3 of the Specific Plan is included at D83. 68 | G623 See Petitioners {(POHH) August 2, | This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. 2017 objections: drafts of an April | Relevant, nonprivileged and/or nonprotected draft documents are 2017 staff report included in the record. The final ASR is included at D79. 69 | G635 SAR Documents Which Reference | This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. But Do Not Include Attachments This document refers to attachments to the staff report for the May 2017 Board meeting, the relevant versions of which have been provided elsewhere in the record, for example at D79-8 and D79- 18. Moreover, this was disclosed as part of the PRA and is being provided now, even though it is not relevant for purposes of the record. Index But Not On Flash Drive Obj. | SAR Doc. | Petitioners’ Objections | Response - . No. | No. 1 Cl Cb fs Be ie ew Zn Bo ae vee ae Fone en ne ete oi 70 | G650 SAR Documents Which Reference | This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. This But Do Not Include Attachments document refers to instructions on how to access videos of Board meetings on the Internet. This document is not relevant. Moreover, this was disclosed as part of the PRA and is being provided again now, even though it is not relevant for purposes of the record. 71 | G654 SAR Documents Which Reference | Noted; this document is being provided to you now. But Do Not Include Attachments 72 | G657 SAR Documents Which Reference | This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. But Do Not Include Attachments This document refers to G519. 73 | G680 SAR Documents Which Reference | This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. But Do Not Include Attachments This document refers to G679. 74 | G683 SAR Documents Which Reference | This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. But Do Not include Attachments This document refers to G667 and is attached to the email at G682. See also D82, the County's Powerpoint Presentation. 75 | G684 SAR Documents Which Reference | This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. But Do Not Include Attachments This document refers to G655 and G679. 76 | G685 SAR Documents Which Reference | This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. But Do Not Include Attachments The Gnatcatcher Report is at F26 and in the email at G677. 77 | G729 SAR Documents Which Reference | This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. But Do Not Include Attachments This document refers to G728. See also G731. 78 | G743 SAR Documents Which Include This objection does not demonstrate a deficiency in the record. Inoperable Links This refers to a final version of the Specific Plan shared via a third- party file sharing website link that is no longer operating. The relevant drafts or versions of the Specific Plan required to be included in the record under PRC 21167.6 have been included in the record for example at D79-7. The revisions requested by County staff are set forth in this document and in others (G738) and are shown in H1. 79 | G765 Incorrectly identified Noted; the index will be corrected. 80 | G766 Incorrectly identified Noted; the index will be corrected. 81 | G71 SAR Documents Referenced in Noted; this document is being provided to you. OF FI CE OF TH E C O U N T Y C O U N S E L C O U N T Y OF O R A N G E © 0 NN O N nv HB W o n = NO N N N N N N N N N = e m e m e m p m e e pe pe d pe e e c o NN O N Wn BR A W N = OO OO 0 0 N D N R W N Y = O PROOF OF SERVICE I declare that I am employed in the County of Orange, over 18 years old and that my business address is 333 W. Santa Ana Blvd., Suite 407, Santa Ana, CA 92701; and, my email address is marz.lair@coco.ocgov.com. I am not a party to the within action. On August 28, 2017, I served the foregoing COUNTY OF ORANGE RESPONSE TO PETITIONERS’ OBJECTIONS TO THE SUPPLEMENT TO THE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD on all other parties to this action in the following manner: [X] (BY ELECTRONIC SERVICE) Pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 2.251(c)(2), I caused an electronic version of the document(s) to be sent to the person(s) listed below. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. DATED: August 28, 2017 al YW - Marzette L. Lair KEVIN K JOHNSON ESQ JEANNE L MACKINNON ESQ 703 PALOMAR AIRPORT RD STE 210 CARLSBAD CA 92011 PH 619 696-6211 FAX 619 696-7516 EMAILS kevin@johnsonlawaplc.com jeanne@johnsonlawaplc.com Attorneys for Petitioners/Plaintiffs: PROTECT OUR HOMES AND HILLS; HILLS FOR EVERYONE; ENDANGERED HABITATS LEAGUE, INC.; CALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETY; FRIENDS OF HARBORS, BEACHES AND PARKS, INC. CHRISTOPHER GARRETT ESQ TAIGA TAKAHASHI ESQ LATHAM & WATKINS LLP 12670 HIGH BLUFF DR SAN DIEGO CA 92130 PH 858 523-5458 FAX 858 523-5450 EMAILS: christopher.garrett@lw.com taiga.takahashi@lw.com Attorneys for Real Parties in Interest: YORBA LINDA ESTATES, LLC PROOF OF SERVICE