5PM City Council
Meeting Time: 06-14-22 17:00
eComments Report
Meetings Meeting
Time
Agenda
Items
Comments Support Oppose Neutral
5PM City Council 06-14-22
17:00
50 16 4 11 1
Sentiments for All Meetings
The following graphs display sentiments for comments that have location data. Only locations of users who have commented will be shown.
Overall Sentiment
5PM City Council
06-14-22 17:00
Agenda Name Comments Support Oppose Neutral
8. Environmental Impact Report and Preliminary Design Approval for the Broadway Bridge Project (T15155300) File ID: 2022-01107 1 0 1 0
18. (Pass for Publication) Proposed Panhandle Impact Fee Ordinance File ID: 2022-00338
1 0 0 1
34. An Ordinance Revising Chapter 12.96 of the Sacramento City Code Relating to Access to Health Care Facilities as an Emergency Measure to Take Effect Immediately Upon Adoption [Two-Thirds Vote Required] File ID: 2022-01223
3 3 0 0
Public Comments-Matters Not on the Agenda 11 1 10 0
Sentiments for All Agenda Items
The following graphs display sentiments for comments that have location data. Only locations of users who have commented will be shown.
Overall Sentiment
Agenda Item: eComments for 8. Environmental Impact Report and Preliminary Design Approval for the Broadway Bridge Project (T15155300) File ID: 2022-01107
Overall Sentiment
Lina Braunstein
Location:
Submitted At: 2:42pm 06-13-22
Request to have Bridge Item from the June 14, 2022 Consent Calendar of Council meeting (item#8) to be Rescheduled for approval to a time that staff can present an overview of the responses to Sacramento citizen's concerns, take questions from the Council members and hear the final concerns voiced in the Public Comments.
Please refer to attachment. Thank you.
Agenda Item: eComments for 18. (Pass for Publication) Proposed Panhandle Impact Fee Ordinance File ID: 2022-00338 Overall Sentiment
Matthew Kessing
Location:
Submitted At: 10:50am 06-13-22
Please clarify the meaning of Section 18.56.1140(A)(2): "Development credits do not run with the land." Also, does the Panhandle Finance Plan elaborate on the financial solvency of the PHIF fund with respect to long- term maintenance of the infrastructure created during build-out of the Panhandle Area? The background document simply states that with "the PHIF will provide $31MM of the overall $70MM needed for facilities and infrastructure identified in the Updated Finance Plan for the Panhandle area." What is being done to ensure that the rest of the City taxpayers aren't left with a bill to maintain the car-dependent suburban infrastructure 10-15 years down the road? Does the Panhandle have sufficient proposed density to generate enough tax revenue to maintain it's own infrastructure into perpetuity? If the answer is "no" then the development plan should be revised to consider future infrastructure maintenance in the finances.
Agenda Item: eComments for 34. An Ordinance Revising Chapter 12.96 of the Sacramento City Code Relating to Access to Health Care Facilities as an Emergency Measure to Take Effect Immediately Upon Adoption [Two-Thirds Vote Required] File ID:
2022-01223
Overall Sentiment
Christina Dal Porto
Location:
Submitted At: 7:22am 06-14-22
Our names are Jeff and Chris Dal Porto, and we are constituents. We are writing to express our support for Discussion Item 34 Relating to Access to Health Care Facilities to revise ordinance 12.96.
Our daughter was a volunteer who helped provide safe passage for patients attempting to enter a facility. She was called horrible names, sworn at, and even told, "Y our mother must be ashamed of you!" which I was not! Requiring additional space for patients won't stop this uncivil behavior but will give those attempting care and the staff/volunteers willing to make the effort more comfortable a little more safe. In the past year Planned Parenthood health care centers have experienced an increase of harassment and intimidation to patients seeking care and to staff providing it. This ordinance amendment would go a long way to protecting health care access.
Please vote to pass Discussion Item 34 and support access to reproductive health care.
Thank you,
Jeff and Chris Dal Porto
Domenica Campanella
Location:
Submitted At: 9:40am 06-12-22
Dear Sacramento Mayor, Vice Mayor, Mayor Pro Tem, and City Council members:
My name is Domenica Campanella, and I'm a constituent. I'm writing to express my support for Discussion Item 34 Relating to Access to Health Care Facilities to revise ordinance 12.96.
In the past year Planned Parenthood health care centers have experienced an increase of harassment and intimidation to patients seeking care and to staff providing it. Planned Parenthood's offering of services are no different than other healthcare facilities, yet they are villified and demonized to extremes I have never seen directed at any other healthcare organizations.
Every human being has a basic and fundamental right to privacy protected by the US Constitution and explicitly guaranteed in California's Constitution, including the right to seek and obtain all health care services permitted under the laws of this state.
Please support ALL your constituents and their access to reproductive health care.
Thank you,
Domenica
Lee Kraljev
Location:
Submitted At: 1:52pm 06-10-22
Dear honorable Sacramento Mayor, Vice Mayor, Mayor Pro Tem, and City Council members, My name is Lee Kraljev, and I'm a constituent. I'm writing/calling to express my support for Discussion Item 34 Relating to Access to Health Care Facilities to revise ordinance 12.96.
In the past year Planned Parenthood health care centers have experienced an increase of harassment and intimidation to patients seeking care and to staff providing it.
This ordinance amendment would go a long way to protecting health care access.
Every person in the City of Sacramento has a basic and fundamental right to privacy protected by the US Constitution and explicitly guaranteed in California's Constitution, including the right to seek and obtain all health care services permitted under the laws of this state.
Please vote to pass Discussion Item 34 and support access to reproductive health care.
Thank you,
Lee Kraljev
Agenda Item: eComments for Public Comments-Matters Not on the Agenda Overall Sentiment
Mark Landa
Location:
Submitted At: 8:53am 06-14-22
Co mayor Harris has continues to lie to this community. This was never brought up to the community and all of a sudden it has been approved for building. The leaders of this project have no right to tell us what to do in teaching our kids, let us parents deal with that. By you building this in front of my kids school is ridiculous considering there are plenty of other areas where this can be built. Shame on you!!! My kids will no longer be attending this school once this is built. The idea is great but the location is wrong. Y ou are not thinking about the children and that is wrong with our society and leaders. Children come first!!!! Marivel Ruiz
Location:
Submitted At: 8:15am 06-14-22
I am totally against this project that they want to carry out, which part does not understand that the safety of people's children comes first. Here are people who work hard every day to be able to pay for their homes, rent, their SECURITY! I am more than anything afraid because only a fence is going to separate me from this project. I have two daughters who spend their time in the yard playing and thanks to this they will not be able to go out to the yard for fear I have already been a victim of the fact that the homeless have put my house to steal! I'm not sure that they continue with the project, but not HERE! There is so much free space where they don't harm anyone! Be aware, aren't they human? Or is this discrimination against Latinos? Because most of the people who live in this community are 80% Hispanic.
Annette Emery
Location:
Submitted At: 7:51am 06-14-22
I have lived in the Gardenland Northgate area for 27 years and I support Joshua's House supportive housing for terminally ill homeless. The location near a school on an empty lot that generally is filled with weeds and garbage. I believe that the addition of six modular buildings with gardens will make the area more attractive along with displaying empathy and care for the poorest among us. Thank you.
CH Gg
Location:
Submitted At: 5:30am 06-14-22
I dont think its a good idea crimes gonna go hire and the kids wont be safe Mariano Jimenez
Location:
Submitted At: 12:27am 06-14-22
My name is Mariano Jimenez. I live in the area and this idea of placing a hospice/homeless center in front a school is totally absurd. Kids will be in danger everyday when they walk to their home. They will see homeless people doing drugs, fighting, screaming, just being passed out in the sidewalks. Its not a good example for young minds. Just to think that people are going to be dying in front of a school with hundred of young kids is a really bad idea. Instead of doing that, you guys should start thinking how to make the community better, building a library for the kids, areas where they can practice sports, just a simple and safe place for the kids and the community. I am totally opposed to the idea of Joshua’s House and everyone in the area think the same way as i do.
Aubrey Garcia
Location:
Submitted At: 12:16am 06-14-22
I Oppose Joshua’s House being built only yards away from Garden Valley Elementary. This brings Fear to Parents like myself who’s Children attend this school. Children shouldn’t be expose on seeing a Homeless Activity at such young age on a daily basis. I’m not against Building Homeless Hospice but please find a more secluded area. Thank you in Advance
Raul C. Huerta
Location:
Submitted At: 10:04pm 06-13-22
I strongly oppose Joshua’s House being built in front of Garden Valley Elementary School. I’m a college student now but I attended GV school and my friends and I never had a park or community center to go to after school.
This is what we need in front of our school, not a homeless hospice. Kids will not benefit from a hospice in front of the school, kids will be traumatized knowing that people are dying there. People say to have compassion for the homeless, but they don’t have compassion for the kids of my neighborhood who don’t have parks or community centers. Have compassion for the kids and STOP Joshua’s House in front of GV School. The city has plenty of public property that is not in front of any schools.
Leticia Huerta
Location:
Submitted At: 9:29pm 06-13-22
I'm writing in strong opposition placing Joshua's House in front of Garden Valley Elementary School. Last year, CM Harris said this proposal was just exploratory and would not be part of the Homeless Master Plan, yet when the draft was released he included Joshua's House in the plan without our knowledge. CM Harris also said this would be a hospice facility and now CM Harris and Joshua's House say it's homeless housing or transitional housing that will provide volunteer hospice care. CM and Joshua's House have lied to our us from day one. We have asked for parks, community centers, libraries which are much in need in our community. However, all CM Harris sees for our community is homeless uses. They also had a groundbreaking and our community was not notified or even allowed to participate. We ask the Council to stop Joshua's House until CM Harris and Joshua's House speak to our community directly. Our community, our neighbors and especially our kids deserve respect and to be safe.
Rebecca Sandoval
Location:
Submitted At: 7:30pm 06-13-22
As Trustee for Garden Valley Elementary School, I raise concerns by the community regarding Joshua House, 3 yards from the school. The location has the potential for homeless individuals to congregate and camp in the area outside of the facility. Parents have shared that their children have encountered homeless men with their pants down while they are walking to school. Children will be walking past a facility where they know that people are dying. Children are very linear in their thinking and should not have to be faced with this. The School District sent a letter to the council detailing mitigation measures to ensure the safety and security of Garden Valley students.
Our concerns have not been addressed. There has not been meaningful community engagement. Lastly the 50- year lease for $1 a year is of great concern. What are the provisions should Joshua House not remain on the city lot in the future?
Raul Huerta
Location:
Submitted At: 5:52pm 06-13-22
In 2019 CM Harris proposed a homeless shelter in our S. Natomas neighborhood, in front of Garden Valley Elementary. Our community overwhelmingly opposed this idea due to safety concerns for our children - fortunately it was stopped. CM Harris was told that our low-resource minority community needs parks, community centers and/or libraries for our children to grow. CM Harris disregarded our concerns and has now pushed another homeless housing project (Joshua’s House) at the same location, a complete disregard for our needs and safety. CM Harris has done everything possible to keep our community unaware of this proposal and the fact that it’s in design review. A private groundbreaking was held last week and people from our community were denied entry (gates placed/security guard). Our community deserves respect and we urge council to acknowledge this transgression and pause this proposal until meaningful community outreach is completed and the community’s needs taken seriously. SNU Pre
Constance Christensen
Location:
Submitted At: 5:49pm 06-13-22
"JOSHUA'S HOUSE" My name is Constance Christensen. I've lived at 3567 Rancho Vista Way in the Garden Valley School neighborhood for 36 years. I vigorously oppose the placement of Joshua House, a homeless hospice facility, across the street from Garden Valley Elementary School. It is an inappropriate use in proximity to elementary school children. The public process for developing this parcel did not include noticing the residents, nor offer any opportunity to provide comment, objection, or mitigating options to the development. Designation of this land for a homeless service without consulting and soliciting adjacent residents violates the California Environmental Quality Act, and the City Council should be ashamed for ramming this project down the throats of residents and taxpayers who have been ignored by their Council representative. I urge you to reconsider the location of this City service and give our neighborhood the voice and respect, it deserves.
June 13, 2022
Lina Braunstein
Sacramento Resident, ZIP 95818
Dear City Council Member,
This is in regards to the ADD IMPROVEMENTS TO BROADWAY BRIDGE PROJECT FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (FIER) CITY COUNCIL, JUNE 14, 2022
As an Upper Land Park Resident (ZIP 95818), I am requesting the City of Sacramento to add language that protects City of Sacramento streets from increased traffic impacts and ensure traffic safety. Would like to see that the definition adopted in 2011 by the City of Sacramento to ensure the benefits of the project are equally shared by both West Sacramento & Sacramento Cities For that reason, solutions are requested for inclusion in the FEIR findings.
Move the Bridge item from the June 14, 2022 Consent Calendar of Council Meeting (item #8. Approval of the Environmental Impact Review and Preliminary design of the Broadway Bridge Project).
Reschedule the item for approval to a time that Staff can present an overview of the responses to Sacramento citizen’s concerns, take questions from the Council members and hear the final concerns voiced in the Public Comments.
Add language to the Bridge Project’s Final EIR to ensure neighborhood friendly bridge objective, protects our city streets and provides public safety.
1. Add signage at 3rd and 5th Streets directing traffic downtown and to X Street. This supports the Neighborhood-Friendly Bridge objective to protect residential streets and supports the stated EIR project objective of having traffic go downtown. (EIR Project Objective, EIR page 1-9).
2. Direct Broadway Complete Streets Project to include signage to direct Broadway traffic at 6th and 8th Streets to X Street.
3. Obligate the City to perform a Traffic Analysis and Safety Evaluation after three years of bridge operation to determine actual impacts and mitigation as needed.
4. Develop a new Transportation Standard of Significance that meets the traffic performance needs of the neighborhoods adjacent to the Central City (The Greater Land Park Community Plan
neighborhoods). The existing Central City LOS F (Level-of-service for intersections) for Broadway and the associated gridlock should never be adopted as a Standard without a corresponding Comprehensive Safety and Mobility Plan that includes multi-model alternatives supported by reliable Public Transportation. ( reference 15 October 2019 Conditional Support for the Broadway complete Streets, LPCA).
5. To prevent additional contributions to gridlock, direct the Sacramento Planning & Development Staff to forego further local density increases in the 2040 General Plan Update, maintaining the intensity of development, as allowed in the current 2035 General Plan, throughout the Tower District ( Broadway and W/X from 9 th-
19th Streets).
Thank you for your consideration in this matter.
Sincerely,
Lina Braunstein, Sacramento resident