The Public Record — Joint Meeting for the Rules and Open Government Committee and Committee of the Whole, August 31, 2022

RULES COMMITTEE: 08/31/2022
Item: B.1
File ID: ROGC 22-361
TO: Honorable Mayor & FROM: Toni J. Taber, CMC
City Council City Clerk
SUBJECT: The Public Record DATE: August 31, 2022
August 18 – August 25, 2022

ITEMS FILED FOR THE PUBLIC RECORD
Letters from Boards, Commissions, and Committees
Letters from the Public

1. Letter from Sandra Harrison Kay, dated August 22, 2022, regarding: SJ City Council thinking vs. our thinking & problem solving panel.

2. Letter from Sandra Harrison Kay, dated August 24, 2022, regarding: 3 things, protest ends: NOTonNOBLE.
____________________________
Toni J. Taber, CMC
City Clerk
TJT/tt
8/25/22, 12:29 PM Mail - Rules and Open Government Committee Agendas - Outlook https://outlook.office365.com/mail/[email protected]/inbox/id/AAQkADhhYzk3NTk1LTBmZDAtNDc4Yi1hN2Q0LTZjNmZjNTk5MT… 1/1 [External Email]
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

FW: SJ City Council thinking vs. our thinking & problem solving panel Webmaster Manager <[email protected]>
Wed 8/24/2022 11:57 AM
To: Rules and Open Government Committee Agendas <[email protected]> 2 attachments (31 KB)
SJ City Councils Thinking vs. Our Thinking.docx; Problem Solvers Panel Letter of Appeal.docx; Hi Megan,
Please find the original email and attachments included on this email. Let me know if you have any troubles with the attachments.

Thank you,
-matt
Matt Opsal
Senior Executive Analyst
City Manager’s Office of Communications
City of San José
200 East Santa Clara Street, San José, CA 95113
P: 408-535-8117
From: Sandra Harrison Kay <
Sent: Monday, August 22, 2022 12:09 PM
To: District1 <[email protected]>; District2 <[email protected]>; District3 <[email protected]>; District4 <[email protected]>; District5 <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; District7 <[email protected]>; District8 <[email protected]>; District9 <[email protected]>; District 10 <[email protected]>; Webmaster Manager <[email protected]> Subject: SJ City Council thinking vs. our thinking & problem solving panel Grateful for any time/attention you give to our letters. If I have the way I believe SJCC is thinking incorrect, please let me know your correct thoughts I will make them public. Thank You! Sandra & Robert Public Record: 1
DO NOT PLACE densely populated caged tiny home sites
near schools, parks, libraries, daycare.

San Jose City Council’s thinking:

What we have heard more than once is this: There are so many schools in San Jose, it is almost impossible not to end up with a tiny home site within a mile of a school. Essentially they tell us, “we have no choice, we are going to have to build near schools. We expect opposition, but we must make the hard decisions”
Our thinking/parents thinking:

We know a percentage of people living in these densely populated caged tiny home sites will wander onto school campuses pandering for money, using the restrooms, wandering into the cafeteria for food. -And the risk for even worse. DO NOT BUILD TINY HOME SITES NEAR ANY SCHOOL, PARK, LIBRARY, DAYCARE. DO NOT RISK THE SAFETY OF OUR CHILDREN/FAMILIES; DO NOT LOAD SCHOOL FACULTY AND

PARENTS OF SCHOOL CHILDREN DOWN WITH THIS PREVENTABLE CHRONIC WORRY, CONCERN, & STRESS.

San Jose City Council’s thinking:

Look at us, tough enough to ignore your opposition and make hard decisions. Look at us, we are getting people off the streets and rescuing homeless people.

Our thinking/parents thinking:

Look at you, SJ City Council, blind and deaf to the valid concerns of your community, willing to put countless children at risk and drown parents in worry and stress. look at you, SJ City Council, willing to pay millions on top of millions placing highly dense populations of people into cages, and millions to maintain these sites. Look at you, SJ City Council.. taking up precious land space, destroying neighborhoods, parks, libraries.. indifferent to the cost, the risk, the safety factors And look at you, SJ City Council, -should you get your way.. all that risk, land, cost, -squishing 100’s of people into cages in neighborhoods, near schools, libraries, daycare..

And another flux of homeless enters into San Jose.. now what? Now what do you do? Keep building densely populated caged tiny home sites?
Your intentions may be good, but they are dangerously short-sighted.

What is your plan for when your plan attracts even more homeless? Restore San Jose to its former glory.

PROBLEM SOLVING PANEL FOR HIGHLY COMPLEX HOMELESS CRISIS I know there are hearts/minds out there attracted to solving highly complex problems; and are willing to volunteer their time; share their expertise, knowledge, life experiences toward a comprehensive solution Come introduce yourselves
I am in the process of creating a new panel of problem solvers, a larger panel, representing a wider range of disciplines.

Our goal, is to address the entire population of homeless in San Jose: to first understand and identify and create a working, agreed upon vocabulary for the diverse group of homeless. i.e., the healthy homeless (exclusively financial reasons for homelessness); the mentally ill; the drug addicted (form of mental illness); the prematurely released inmates; the freeloaders.. etc.

Our goal is to address the current crisis; slow the growth of homelessness; prevent future homelessness.

Our goal is to listen and to share, and regard with respect, the variety of ideas, thinking, imaginings; the pros and cons of each potential solution, per category of homeless. Trouble-shoot for short term and long term solutions. Collaborate with the correct geographic, governmental authorities, law makers, land owners, citizens, leaders, etc. Revisit rules/laws/regulations for their legitimacy in current times; striving to understand which help, which hurt, when it comes to employing a comprehensive solution.

To publicly share the spectrum of ideas, and the spectrum of obstacles; helping all those who call San Jose home appreciate the complexity.

Example:

IDEA: We (average citizens) noticed a large population of homeless living on acres of open land near the San Jose Airport. Our thinking was that this is a good place because of the amount of open land, the distance to resources. Cost effective because it gives one central location for portable restrooms, city garbage pick up, a central location for food distribution and donations. A central location for social services to provide outreach; -and a central location worthy of creating small gardens; investment in landscape improvements, etc. -And we can, in our imaginations, see this really working..

OBSTACLE: This encampment is currently being swept clean of homeless with a deadline of Sept 1st, 2022. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is demanding the city remove homeless residents living there, due to safety concerns, and is threatening to withhold millions of dollars if the camp isn’t cleared.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: We (average citizens) also recognize that, when people are entering into San Jose Airport, visiting from anywhere else in the world.. A giant homeless encampment is not the best ‘welcome to San Jose’ visual. It is not the first impression anyone wants for San Jose. We (average citizens) also recognize it is not okay for the surrounding gas stations, retail establishments, variety of businesses to lose potential business, sense of safety/security because homeless encampments due include illegal activity and create a significant disincentive for any patronage.

This is in draft form, of course. I am still working out details. But I know we need number/mathematical (geniuses preferred) experts. We need economically knowledgeable; we need city planners; we need authority figures, decision makers, at the state, county, city, district and neighborhood levels.

I know numbers people, even geniuses, cannot solve for homelessness alone.

The number one thing to factor into the equation: People; not numbers. Human beings and all that that entails:

We need humanitarians, social workers, psychiatrists, psychologists, everyday neighbors, parents, students, business owners, rigid thinkers, and free thinkers..

This problem involves a plethora of mental illnesses, spiritual issues like greed, low self esteem; biases; prejudice; language and cultural barriers, enabling, drugs, alcohol, PTSD, emotions, -and lack thereof
I am so certain San Jose City’s current plan, current trajectory, building these unjustifiably costly densely populated caged tiny home sites -taking up new land unnecessarily, destroying neighborhoods, children, families, parks, businesses
I am convinced it is a preventable disaster. But what good is it to point out a problem without offering real alternative solutions.

A new, larger, problem solving panel. Solve for homelessness where the absolute most amount of people thrive; addressing the current crisis; slowing the population; preventing future homelessness.

Respectfully listening to, and publicly sharing the hopeful and creative ideas, the very real obstacles, the acknowledgments…
Does this call to problem solve speak to your mind/heart? Introduce yourself to us:

Sandra & Robert type problem solver as the subject and send your basic info; area of expertise to
8/25/22, 12:31 PM Mail - Rules and Open Government Committee Agendas - Outlook https://outlook.office365.com/mail/[email protected]/inbox/id/AAQkADhhYzk3NTk1LTBmZDAtNDc4Yi1hN2Q0LTZjNmZjNTk5MT… 1/2 [External Email]
Fw: 3 things, protest ends: NOTonNOBLE
Agendadesk <[email protected]>
Wed 8/24/2022 3:44 PM
To: Rules and Open Government Committee Agendas <[email protected]> Public Record, thank you!
From: CMOAgendaServices <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, August 24, 2022 3:29 PM
To: Agendadesk <[email protected]>
Subject: FW: 3 things, protest ends: NOTonNOBLE
Thank you,
Rachelle
From: Webmaster Manager <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, August 24, 2022 11:34 AM
To: CMOAgendaServices <[email protected]> Subject: FW: 3 things, protest ends: NOTonNOBLE
Hi CMO Agenda Services,
Please find a public comment below related to Noble Park and the City Council agenda item.

1. an apology to your community for voting 8-2 without any prior community outreach.

2. formal, legal, official relocation away from Noble, and not near any other school, library, park, daycare, nature reserve
Public Record: 2
8/25/22, 12:31 PM Mail - Rules and Open Government Committee Agendas - Outlook https://outlook.office365.com/mail/[email protected]/inbox/id/AAQkADhhYzk3NTk1LTBmZDAtNDc4Yi1hN2Q0LTZjNmZjNTk5MT… 2/2 This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

3. penitencia perk ponds park on Noble receives legal permanent protection and public status as a dedicated charter park. [the entire park, the land currently owned by water district and the land currently owned by city of san jose]
these are our goals and prayers, robert & sandra, on behalf of NOTonNOBLE protestors

Joint Meeting for the Rules and Open Government Committee and Committee of the WholeAugust 31, 2022

Joint Meeting for the Rules and Open Government Committee and Committee of the Whole
August 31, 2022