ECOMMENTS — City Council and Authorities Concurrent, April 25, 2023

Council and Authorities Concurrent Meeting on 2023-04-25 5:00 PM Meeting Time: 04-25-23 17:00
eComments Report
Meetings Meeting
Time
Agenda
Items
Comments Support Oppose Neutral
Council and Authorities Concurrent
Meeting on 2023-04-25 5:00 PM
04-25-23
17:00
14 327 11 294 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

Council and Authorities Concurrent Meeting on 2023-04-25 5:00 PM 04-25-23 17:00
Agenda Name Comments Support Oppose Neutral
The City of Santa Clara is conducting City Council meetings in a hybrid manner (in-person and continues to have methods for the public to participate remotely).
• Via Zoom:
o https://santaclaraca.zoom.us/j/99706759306
Meeting ID: 997-0675-9306
o Phone 1(669) 900-6833
How to Submit Written Public Comment Before City Council Meeting:

1. Use the eComment tab located on the City Council Agenda page https://santaclara.legistar.com/Calendar.aspx). eComments are directly sent to the iLegislate application used by City Council and staff, and become part of the public record. eComment closes 15 minutes before the start of a meeting.

2. By email to [email protected] by 12 p.m. the day of the meeting.

Those emails will be forwarded to the Council and will be uploaded to the City Council Agenda as supplemental meeting material. Emails received after the 12 p.m. cutoff time up through the end of the meeting will form part of the meeting record. Please identify the Agenda Item Number in the subject line of your email. NOTE: Please note eComments and Emails received as public comment will not be read aloud during the meeting.

Agendas, Staff Reports and some associated documents for City Council items may be viewed on the Internet at
https://santaclara.legistar.com/Calendar.aspx
All public records relating to an open session item on this agenda, which are not exempt from disclosure pursuant to the California Public Records Act, that are distributed to a majority of the legislative body will be available for public inspection at the Office of the City Clerk at Sana Clara City Hall, 1500 Warburton Avenue, Santa Clara, CA 95050 at the same time that the public records are distributed or made available to the legislative body. Any draft contracts, ordinances and resolutions posted on the Internet site or distributed in advance of the Council meeting may not be the final documents approved by the City Council. For the final document, you many contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 615- 2220 or [email protected]..
19 1 15 0
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that, pursuant to the provisions of California Government Code §54956 ("The Brown Act") and Section 708 of the Santa Clara City Charter, the majority of the City Council calls for a Special City Council Meeting, to commence and convene on April 25, 2023, at 5:00 p.m. for a Special Meeting to be held virtually and in the City Hall Council Chambers located in the East Wing of City Hall at 1500 Warburton Avenue, Santa Clara, California, to consider the following matter(s) and to potentially take action with respect to them. 3 0 3 0
5:00 PM SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING 5 0 5 0
Call to Order 2 0 2 0
Pledge of Allegiance and Statement of Values 3 0 3 0
Roll Call 5 0 5 0
PUBLIC HEARING/GENERAL BUSINESS 7 1 6 0
Agenda Name Comments Support Oppose Neutral
23-272 Consideration and Possible Actions on a Proposed 30-Unit Homekey Interim Housing Development on County-Owned Land Located at Lawrence Expressway and Benton Street, Including City Sponsorship and Partial Funding of Project Operations (CEQA: Statutory Exemption under Government Code Section 65913.4, SB 35 Affordable Housing Projects)
259 8 234 1
REPORTS OF MEMBERS AND SPECIAL COMMITTEES 2 0 2 0
CITY MANAGER/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REPORT 2 0 2 0
ADJOURNMENT 2 0 2 0
The next regular scheduled meeting is on Tuesday, May 9, 2023 in the City Hall Council Chambers.
1 0 1 0
MEETING DISCLOSURES 3 0 3 0
Agenda Name Comments Support Oppose Neutral
The time limit within which to commence any lawsuit or legal challenge to any quasi-adjudicative decision made by the City is governed by Section 1094.6 of the Code of Civil Procedure, unless a shorter limitation period is specified by any other provision. Under Section 1094.6, any lawsuit or legal challenge to any quasi-adjudicative decision made by the City must be filed no later than the 90th day following the date on which such decision becomes final. Any lawsuit or legal challenge, which is not filed within that 90-day period, will be barred. If a person wishes to challenge the nature of the above section in court, they may be limited to raising only those issues they or someone else raised at the meeting described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Santa Clara, at or prior to the meeting. In addition, judicial challenge may be limited or barred where the interested party has not sought and exhausted all available administrative remedies.

STREAMING SERVICES: As always, the public may view the meetings on SantaClaraCA.gov, Santa Clara City Television (Comcast cable channel 15 or AT&T U-verse channel 99), or the livestream on the City's Y ouTube channel or Facebook page.

Note: The public cannot participate in the meeting through these livestreaming methods; livestreaming capabilities may be disrupted at times, viewers may always view and participate in meetings in-person and via Zoom as noted on the agenda.

AB23 ANNOUNCEMENT: Members of the Santa Clara Stadium Authority, Sports and Open Space Authority and Housing Authority are entitled to receive $30 for each attended meeting.

Note: The City Council and its associated Authorities meet as separate agencies but in a concurrent manner. Actions taken should be considered actions of only the identified policy body.

LEGEND: City Council (CC); Stadium Authority (SA); Sports and Open Space Authority (SOSA); Housing Authority (HA); Successor Agency to the City of Santa Clara Redevelopment Agency (SARDA); Bayshore North Project Enhancement Authority (BNPEA); Public Facilities Financing Corporation (PFFC)
Public contact was made by posting the Council agenda on the City's official-notice bulletin board outside City Hall Council Chambers. A complete agenda packet is available on the City's website and in the City Clerk's Office at least 72 hours prior to a Regular Meeting and 24 hours prior to a Special Meeting. A hard copy of any agenda report may be requested by contacting the City Clerk's Office at (408) 615-2220, email [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> or at the public information desk at any City of Santa Clara public library.

The City of Santa Clara will generally, upon request, provide appropriate aids and services leading to effective communication for qualified persons with disabilities including those with speech, hearing, or vision impairments so they can participate equally in the City's programs, services, and activities. The City of Santa Clara will make all reasonable modifications to policies and programs to ensure that people with disabilities have an equal opportunity to enjoy all of its programs, services, and activities.

Agendas and other written materials distributed during a public meeting that are public record will be made available by the City in an appropriate alternative format. Contact the City Clerk's Office at 1 408-615-2220 with your request for an alternative format copy of the agenda or other written 14 1 11 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 The City of Santa Clara is conducting City Council meetings in a hybrid manner (in-person and continues to have methods for the public to participate remotely). • Via Zoom:
o https://santaclaraca.zoom.us/j/99706759306
Meeting ID: 997-0675-9306
o Phone 1(669) 900-6833
How to Submit Written Public Comment Before City Council Meeting:

2. By email to [email protected] by 12 p.m. the day of the meeting. Those emails will be forwarded to the Council and will be uploaded to the City Council Agenda as supplemental meeting material. Emails received after the 12 p.m. cutoff time up through the end of the meeting will form part of the meeting record. Please identify the Agenda Item Number in the subject line of your email. NOTE: Please note eComments and Emails received as public comment will not be read aloud during the meeting.

Overall Sentiment
Ying Lu
Location:

Submitted At: 2:56pm 04-25-23
Our family strongly oppose the Benton shelter project at Lawrence and Benton. It's a place dedicated for families in the neighborhood to celebrate holidays as our tradition. It's also not a suitable venue for shelter. It's not closed to public services and groceries.

Huan Li
Location:

Submitted At: 2:34pm 04-25-23
Oppose! We can't sacrifice our community's well-being by blindly building a homeless shelter. A lot of info in previous meetings was misleading. We must empathize with the children and prioritize their healthy growth. How can they have a healthy development in an environment filled with mentally ill and drug-abusing individuals? Deborah Dempsey
Location:

Submitted At: 2:17pm 04-25-23
I oppose the proposed interim housing site at Benton and Lawrence. "Special needs" individuals that have not received the training and support during the early years of development will require HUGE sums of money and supportive services to assimilate into society. The development in 3155 Stars and Stripes Drive is a better venue for interim housing.

Ying Xu
Location:

Submitted At: 2:06pm 04-25-23
I strongly oppose building a homeless facility at Benton!! Milena Brozyna
Location:

Submitted At: 11:34am 04-25-23
We believe a location further from schools, parks and residential areas will be better suited for the project Megan Katz
Location:

Submitted At: 8:27pm 04-24-23
The new proposal is horrible. It keeps no-screening procedures but plans to put innocent kids next to sex offenders and people with drug addiction, just in order to get a high score for funding. LufeMoves put kids in danger on purpose and ruin their entire life! Shame on LifeMoves! Yiming Xu
Location:

Submitted At: 8:10pm 04-24-23
I am a resident here in Santa Clara County. I STRONGL Y OPPOSED to this action as it will pose tremendous risk to the kids here.

Sarah Foad
Location:

Submitted At: 7:50pm 04-24-23
I'm a healthcare worker at Stanford and resident of Santa Clara. I've witnessed the impact of homelessness on the health of our community. Research shows that access to housing is one of the most powerful social determinants of health. The combination of housing with comprehensive health support services is the most cost- effective intervention, maximizing taxpayer dollars by reducing the number of emergency room visits, hospital stays, and ambulance rides. Vote yes on this proposal.

Aashi Verma
Location:

Submitted At: 7:33pm 04-24-23
I am in strong opposition of this homeless shelter because of the many safety issues it comes with.

Greg Dacosta
Location:

Submitted At: 5:07pm 04-24-23
Please allow all residents speak and have dialogue. Not in a manner that all questions are taken in one minute speech from each speaker and few answers are given. It has not be like Q&A session where people are allowed ask counter questions in response answer.

Please do not limit meeting time to 3 hours only
Sharanagoud Devaraddi
Location:

Submitted At: 4:57pm 04-24-23
I strongly opposed to build a homeless facility at Benton! Mingmin Zhu
Location:

Submitted At: 4:10pm 04-24-23
Strongly opposed to build a homeless facility at Benton!!! There are many daycares, schools in this area. Even the kids always play around this area. The non screen shelter can pose high risks to the children and families. Please protect the children!

PENG JIANG
Location:

Submitted At: 10:22am 04-24-23
Low barriar and non-screen shelter is not acceptable at all.

Ashish Verma
Location:

Submitted At: 4:24pm 04-23-23
I strongly oppose a low barrier entry shelter close to any residential neighborhood. At a minimum, the city should enforce background checks and screening so that anytime such an initiative is planned close to residences, the security of residents does not become an afterthought. It is heartbreaking to see our city and county officials ignore and criticize their own residents for being concerned around safety and security. No to this proposal.

Fei Luo
Location:

Submitted At: 3:06pm 04-23-23
I strongly opposed to build a homeless facility at Benton! Low barrier, non-screening homeless poses serious safety risk to the communities and schools around Benton. As a resident and parent of my kids who is studying in the near by school, I oppose the Benton project that deeply concerns my family! Benny Fong
Location:

Submitted At: 11:10am 04-23-23
I strongly oppose any shelter at Benton. This is absolutely the WRONG location for homeless shelter of any kind.

There are 11,000 school aged children attending the fifteen plus K-12 schools. It is absolutely irresponsible to place a homeless shelter in this location. Don't sacrifice our kids for your political agenda! There is Bella Vista shelter 1/2 mile away already. Why does the City of Santa Clara, with a population of only one hundred thousand, have to build so many homeless shelter?
Melissa Lee
Location:

Submitted At: 10:49am 04-23-23
Strong oppose! Low barrier, no screening, allowing occupants with drug addiction, criminal records, sex offenders Benton is a bustling community hub attracting 3,000+ families yearly Over 11k families are at risk; similar sites experienced a rise in police calls A second shelter opened 0.5 miles away
LifeMoves is poorly staffed, low success rate in permanent housing, and location far from public transit, grocery, and jobs
False data was presented, no integrity!
Politically motivated supporters.

Jaccard Pan
Location:

Submitted At: 10:47am 04-23-23
I strongly opposes the Benton Shelter Plan because LifeMoves has a very bad record of running homeless shelters in nearby cities. Do you know 74% of their clients are still homeless after existing LifeMoves' shelter, because they cannot get quality service from there? They don't even feel safe there. Do you know LifeMoves doubled the cost estimate of their existing shelter within a year of approval? The unreasonable cost overrun indicates LifeMoves are losing control of their project.

Jennifer Qiang
Location:

Submitted At: 8:39am 04-23-23
I'm Jennifer residing in Santa Clara with my family, I hold a firm stance against the construction of a homeless facility at Benton, primarily due to concerns for the safety of my children.

Agenda Item: eComments for NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that, pursuant to the provisions of California Government Code §54956 ("The Brown Act") and Section 708 of the Santa Clara City Charter, the majority of the City Council calls for a Special City Council Meeting, to commence and convene on April 25, 2023, at 5:00 p.m. for a Special Meeting to be held virtually and in the City Hall Council Chambers located in the East Wing of City Hall at 1500 Warburton Avenue, Santa Clara, California, to consider the following matter(s) and to potentially take action with respect to them.

Overall Sentiment
Ying Xu
Location:

Submitted At: 2:07pm 04-25-23
I strongly oppose building a homeless facility at Benton!! Beth Ross
Location:

Submitted At: 12:43pm 04-25-23
We Strongly oppose the proposed shelter at Benton.

Quote from the Packet: "Certain registered sex offenders would not be placed at the site WHILE children are living there".

Does that mean "registered sex offenders" would be placed in this proposed shelter if no more homeless family living there?
What about children living next door to this proposed shelter? Does that mean only homeless children matter for Homekey?
Since when "registered sex offenders" have higher priority than our children? Nisha Mehta
Location:

Submitted At: 11:42am 04-25-23
We Strongly oppose this for the safety of our children & Neghibourhood. We are very much concerned about this & surprised on city making such proposals. This is UNACCEPTABLE & we Stronly OPPOSE! _ Agenda Item: eComments for 5:00 PM SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING Overall Sentiment
Betty Wiseman
Location:

Submitted At: 3:51pm 04-25-23
Can someone clarify if the proposed site is Benton and Lawrence? The City Council Notice of Public Hearing states it is located at 2350 Benton Street, about two miles east of Benton/Lawrence.

Strong Oppose to any shelter in residential communities. .

Phil Zhao
Location:

Submitted At: 3:46pm 04-25-23
STRONGL Y Oppose! Please vote "no".

Ying Xu
Location:

Submitted At: 2:07pm 04-25-23
I strongly oppose building a homeless facility at Benton!! Beth Ross
Location:

Submitted At: 12:56pm 04-25-23
We STRONL Y OPPOSE this proposal.

There is no design detail in the Packet.

How many rooms in one unit? Is one unit only for one family? Can multi families live in one unit? How did you come up with total 120 people?
Please vote No to this proposal. We don't want to write a blank check to LifeMoves; their operating records are bad enough already.

Ashish Verma
Location:

Submitted At: 11:42am 04-23-23
Please vote "No" and listen to the vast majority of your tax paying residents. We are willing to work with you in finding solutions that are acceptable and help solve the homelessness issue. This location is a good fit for families with livelihood nearby who may be on the verge of being homeless and do not pose a risk. Please do not play with our lives by imposing folks with criminal background due to lack of screening. Y ou actions would show whether you really care about our lives.

Agenda Item: eComments for Call to Order
Overall Sentiment
Ying Xu
Location:

Submitted At: 2:09pm 04-25-23
I strongly oppose building a homeless facility at Benton!! Brian West
Location:

Submitted At: 11:01pm 04-23-23
We strongly oppose to this proposed low barrier homeless shelter at Benton & Lawrence. Vote it down! Go find some other more suitable site. Benton at Lawrence is the WRONG location.

The Benton/Lawrence lot is our community land. Thousands of families utilize this lot for community activities every year.

Don't Take Away Our Land!
Agenda Item: eComments for Pledge of Allegiance and Statement of Values Overall Sentiment
Ying Xu
Location:

Submitted At: 2:10pm 04-25-23
I strongly oppose building a homeless facility at Benton!! Beth Ross
Location:

Submitted At: 1:12pm 04-25-23
Again quote from the Packet: "If at some point there were no unhoused households with children to place, the building would place single clients in dorm style "flex" units. What IS a "flex" unit? So all these housing for homeless family with children is just a façade to get approval. LifeMoves can do anything once it get to build the shelter; the operators have the power do any changes. We as citizens of this neighborhood has NONE. How sad would that be?
We Strongly OPPOSE this proposal.

Benny Fong
Location:

Submitted At: 10:10am 04-25-23
We OPPOSE the low-barrier interim housing proposed at Benton St Misinformation everywhere in LifeMove Packet doc.
7-11 is NOT a grocery store; it's a convivence store. Folks go to 7-11 to buy liquors and condoms.

So there is no easy access to grocery store. This is a desperate attempt to make the proposal look qualified.

This is just one example of misinformation. Please read pages 12 to 16 of the Packet doc.

Agenda Item: eComments for Roll Call
Overall Sentiment
BJ Huang
Location:

Submitted At: 2:14pm 04-25-23
We OPPOSE this proposal.

The homeless people who don't find permanent housing and who are at the end of their “interim” stay are going to be forced out of the shelter. They are going to congregate near the shelter site, thereby impacting the immediate neighborhood. It will only get worse as days goes by! This is not solving the homeless problem. It is just dumping the homeless, and issues that come with being homeless in our neighborhood. What is the County's plan to mitigate this problem?
Ying Xu
Location:

Submitted At: 2:10pm 04-25-23
I strongly oppose building a homeless facility at Benton!! Seth Steingraph
Location:

Submitted At: 11:59am 04-25-23
Please ask the people who support this proposal HOW CLOSE they live to this location. If they live very close and still support the project, then hats off to them. If, like me, they live a mile or more away, then take their comments with a grain of salt. It's very easy to claim the moral high ground when one is only minimally affected themselves; it's much harder when one has to actually deal with the consequences.

Bess Henderson
Location:

Submitted At: 11:54am 04-25-23
We OPPOSE the low-barrier interim housing proposed at Benton & Lawrence.

The City needs to do more community outreach before voting. The surrounding community needs to get notified correctly about this hearing. City Council Meeting Notice of Public Hearing put out confusing information.

Benton at Lawrence actual address is 3590 Benton Street, Not 2350 Benton as printed on the Notice.

Residents near Benton and Lawrence might not pay attention because they will think it's about 2350 Benton.

Benny Fong
Location:

Submitted At: 11:48am 04-23-23
I strongly oppose any shelter at Benton. This is absolutely the WRONG location for homeless shelter of any kind.

Agenda Item: eComments for PUBLIC HEARING/GENERAL BUSINESS Overall Sentiment
Niranjan Manjunath
Location:

Submitted At: 3:25pm 04-25-23
Strongly Oppose shelter project at Lawrence and Benton. The proposed development lacks adequate security measures, which could lead to an uptick in criminal activity and drug abuse in our area. Additionally, the development's proximity to nearby schools raises concerns about the safety of our children. We also believe that the proposed development would require a significant investment of taxpayer funds for infrastructure improvements, which we believe could be better utilized elsewhere.

Diane Harrison
Location:

Submitted At: 3:21pm 04-25-23
Forgot to add that the opposition ignored USPS regulations and put an unstamped & unaddressed flier in our mailbox, and probably a lot of others. The support side took care not to do that.

Ying Lu
Location:

Submitted At: 2:58pm 04-25-23
Our family strongly oppose the Benton shelter project at Lawrence and Benton. It's a place dedicated for families in the neighborhood to celebrate holidays as our tradition. It's also not a suitable venue for shelter. It's not closed to public services and groceries.

Ying Xu
Location:

Submitted At: 2:10pm 04-25-23
I strongly oppose building a homeless facility at Benton!! sergey gorbunov
Location:

Submitted At: 9:20am 04-25-23
I am writing to express my strong opposition about Benton proposal for a low barrier homeless shelter. The homeless shelter will bring to our neighborhood drugs, related crimes and vandalism Greg Dacosta
Location:

Submitted At: 5:10pm 04-24-23
Please allow 3 minutes to each attendee provide immediate answers to question and have dialogue. Please do not restrict people from asking counter questions in response to answers. Please make sure that zoom, Santa Clara/Sunnyvale residents who are close to this location are given priority and county does not bring a flock of supporters from outside
Benny Fong
Location:

Submitted At: 11:48am 04-23-23
I strongly oppose any shelter at Benton. This is absolutely the WRONG location for homeless shelter of any kind.

Agenda Item: eComments for 23-272 Consideration and Possible Actions on a Proposed 30-Unit Homekey Interim Housing Development on County-Owned Land Located at Lawrence Expressway and Benton Street, Including City Sponsorship and Partial Funding of Project Operations (CEQA: Statutory Exemption under Government Code Section 65913.4, SB 35 Affordable Housing Projects)
Overall Sentiment
Kevin Chen
Location:

Submitted At: 4:43pm 04-25-23
I strongly disagree with the proposal as there are numerous daycare centers and schools located within a mile radius. Additionally, the transportation options are not convenient for the homeless population, and their potential presence in the area would create a safety concern for the children.

Daniel Ruan
Location:

Submitted At: 4:40pm 04-25-23
My family and I strongly oppose the proposal. The low barrier shelter will bring severe safety problems to nearby residents. There is no convenient public transportation nearby in this area. Overall, it's a very bad choice to build shelter in this location
Serge Filatov
Location:

Submitted At: 4:37pm 04-25-23
The community has voiced a large number of reasons for why the shelter should not be located in such a dense residential neighborhood, some of which are concerning. The City needs to find a different location.

Andy Pluemer
Location:

Submitted At: 4:33pm 04-25-23
I oppose the Benton/Lawrence project.

Vanessa Chen
Location:

Submitted At: 4:30pm 04-25-23
My husband and I live 10 mins walk from the proposed site. We strongly opposed building the shelter in the proposed location. Our concerns are safety of neighborhood and its financial burden on tax payer, not only in construction but also in maintaince.

Bharath Pandravada
Location:

Submitted At: 4:28pm 04-25-23
We live very close to the proposed site and I strongly oppose the Benton shelter project in Santa Clara. There are definitely better alternatives to help the homeless than building a shelter in this location. With so many schools around, it could have negative effects on safety for children and neighborhood as a whole.

Please take our concerns into account and reconsider this proposal.

Kautul Mehta
Location:

Submitted At: 4:26pm 04-25-23
I strongly oppose due to the following reasons -
- safety concerns due to a low barrier to entry
- short term shelter instead of a longer term shelter catering to families - no committed funding putting burden on city of santa clara - close to 10+ parks and schools
- busy/unsafe intersection for homeless folks who are mentally ill K Rajesh Jagannath
Location:

Submitted At: 4:24pm 04-25-23
Dear Sir/ Madam,
I oppose the Proposed 30-Unit Homekey Interim Housing Development on County-Owned Land Located at Lawrence Expressway and Benton Street.

This project reduces the sense of security if the neighborhood - this project is in close proximity to schools, apartments and homes.

I oppose this project in the best interest of the community that will be impacted.

Bests,
K Rajesh Jagannath
Luyao Xu
Location:

Submitted At: 4:22pm 04-25-23
Our family live only one block away and we oppose this low barrier shelter. It's unacceptable to build another shelter within walking distance to primary school. It's hard to be a safety and nice community with two shelters so close.

CH Huang
Location:

Submitted At: 4:17pm 04-25-23
We live 3 blocks away & strongly oppose the proposed Benton location.

1. Safety for our children and seniors. This is a dense residential area with many schools and high foot traffic.

This project shouldn't be placed so close to the vulnerable.

2. With a 26% success for 3m placement, where are the homeless going to go after? Our streets &park.

3. Already witnessing an increase in property crime.

4. We want to help the homeless but NOT at the expense of safety of our family &community.

Bhargava krishnamurthy
Location:

Submitted At: 4:17pm 04-25-23
People who don't want Sunnyvale to be safe have proposed this project. So far, Sunnyvale was rated as the safest city in US.

Lisa C
Location:

Submitted At: 4:15pm 04-25-23
While I support the City's goal to build more housing for the homeless, I am opposed to the Benton-Lawrence site due to the location's inability to successfully serve the homeless. The Benton-Lawrence site is off a busy expressway designed more for people with cars making a quick stop. The proposed site is right across the street from a discount liquor store and the nearest public bus stop is 0.7 miles away (not a short walk) - increasing risk to safety-health for all. Find a better location.

Jamie Lin
Location:

Submitted At: 4:13pm 04-25-23
My family strongly oppose the proposal. The low barrier shelter will bring severe safety concerns to the closely located schools, houses, apartments, and parks. Also there is no good public transportation to support the commute for the people live in. It they walk around the streets without a good manner, it impacts the peace of the whole community. There is a shelter just 10 min walk away. No reason to built another one next to it. Please reconsider and put the efforts on the things worth it.

Jianmin Yue
Location:

Submitted At: 4:11pm 04-25-23
I strongly oppose the shelter.

The shelter is not helping the homeless people who really want to change their life via finding jobs. Because there is no job opportunities nearby. There are high percentage homeless people with mental issues, they won't be back to job at all.

The shelter harm the community a lot. There are lots of schools within one mile. The homeless people with criminal history and drug issues will wandering around and put in danger of our kids.

Ashish Patel
Location:

Submitted At: 4:09pm 04-25-23
I strongly oppose the proposal due to the following reasons:
1) Safety Concerns: There is no background check to screen out criminals and drug addicts 2) No committed/ear marked funding for policing
3) Financial burden on Santa Clara: The city lacks funding to sustain the huge burden after the homekey funding runs out (we the people would need to bear the brunt)
Aihua Lei
Location:

Submitted At: 4:07pm 04-25-23
I strongly oppose this this plan! This land is for community event purpose, city and county can not just ignore its original purpose and force it into a homeless shelter ignoring community residential's benefit. There are a lot of problems of the project itself, LifeMoves has been failing in all recent homeless shelter projects, they are not reliable at all to run this project. There is a huge funding gap that city and country don't even have idea how to run this project for coming 3-5 years.
ruc kh
Location:

Submitted At: 4:06pm 04-25-23
A project like this one should not be in a residential neighborhood with so many schools surrounding it. This housing is not necessary as we already have one on Bella Vista. Drug abuse and crime are #1 concern and there has been no mention of how these will be addressed or controlled. If the city refuses to heed to tax payer's requests, we will be forced to move to safer neighborhoods where our voices are heard and expected.

Yang Jiao
Location:

Submitted At: 4:06pm 04-25-23
Our family strongly oppose to this proposal. We live very nearby and this site location is not suitable for building such temporary housing.

The density LifeMoves proposed is too high, with >90 rooms on a 1 acre lot. It raises concerns about the environmental impact and safety of housing so many people on such a small site.

Also it's located at a very busy intersection with lots of car traffics. It would be dangerous for homeless, especially with physical/mental issues, to walk around
Jessica Hu
Location:

Submitted At: 4:05pm 04-25-23
As a resident of Santa Clara city, I strongly opposed this project. First, it’s not an good position for people to live in. The proposed location is right beside the Lawrence expressway which is dangerous and full of noise.

Secondly, I worried about the safety of our children and seniors. The company Life Movers has never earned the trust from the community. I hope my voice is heard! Thanks! Elia Nino
Location:

Submitted At: 4:02pm 04-25-23
I've attended two of the sessions regarding this project and have questions I don't think have been addressed fully:

What is the enforcement of illegal activity prevention? How is "low barrier" entry defined? What are the guidelines? Are rehabiliation services included?
Why was there such a discrepancy between the # of schools presented? What's the plan for funding runs out in 3 years?
Lowered property values? There was an attempt to discredit the report by citing criticism of the analysis.

Yueming Sun
Location:

Submitted At: 4:01pm 04-25-23
We strongly oppose the shelter! The shelter accept homeless people with criminal history, such as sex offenders, mental issue. This put in danger of the kids and elderly in the community. It is a terrible location. There are many schools within one mile. And there is no public transportation nearby for the homeless to find a job. Y ou should consider alternative locations such as industrial area. Wrong location. Please do not only care the homeless people, care our residents as well.

Ashlyn Ju
Location:

Submitted At: 4:01pm 04-25-23
LifeMoves is an unreliable partner to deliver success. It fails in all aspects: budget estimate, staff, service, execute policy, help homeless, manage neighborhood safety, and more.

Deepa Vaidhyanathan
Location:

Submitted At: 3:43pm 04-25-23
I strongly oppose the proposal for this shelter as it is so close to so many schools and homes and safety is a big concern.

Betty Wiseman
Location:

Submitted At: 3:41pm 04-25-23
We live very close to the proposed site. We have daily walk in our neighborhood. With the hundreds of homeless expected to congregate near our home, we can't imagine to walk without a police escort. There is Bella Vista shelter already on El Camino Real 1/2 mile away. Why our city needs to build so many shelter? Strong NO to the proposed shelter
.

Mehrdad Aghvami
Location:

Submitted At: 3:36pm 04-25-23
Our family strongly oppose this project in this location. As we have previously raised many concerns such as safety, increased crime and drug use activities. Also, the "shelter" will not be able to deal with the people that need mental care of its residence that will spill over into the neighborhood. This will have a huge negative impact on all local businesses as well.

Vin Warerkar
Location:

Submitted At: 3:16pm 04-25-23
I oppose this proposal for reasons that include

1. Child Safety: increased risk due to close proximity to multiple toddler day care facilities and elementary schools_2. Public Safety: further deterioration of public safety in neighborhood as there is already an increase in theft and vandalism on the neighborhood
3 Low Entry Barrier Housing: lacks evidence that this helps the homeless overcome poverty, drug abuse, mental health and other causes of homelessness
Ying Lu
Location:

Submitted At: 2:59pm 04-25-23
We are resident of Santa Clara city. Our family strongly oppose the Benton shelter project at Lawrence and Benton. It's a place dedicated for families in the neighborhood to celebrate holidays as our tradition. It's also not a suitable venue for shelter. It's not closed to public services and groceries.

Aditi Chandra
Location:

Submitted At: 2:58pm 04-25-23
I live 2 blocks from the proposed shelter and I strongly oppose the project. My kids and in-laws regularly walk that route and I feel unsafe having drug addicts, sex offenders, and felony criminals in and around my kids and family.

Nitin Bahadur
Location:

Submitted At: 2:55pm 04-25-23
I oppose a low-barrier homeless shelter in a residential district surrounded by 10+ schools. By trying to do a righteous thing, the city is creating more problems for the society at large.

Amith Deshpande
Location:

Submitted At: 2:55pm 04-25-23
I strongly oppose to this proposal. Wrong location for this purpose.

Tina Lao
Location:

Submitted At: 2:41pm 04-25-23
I strongly oppose the homeless shelter in residential area. Please don’t attract more homeless close to school.

We must have better solutions than this. Please hear Santa Clara residents’ voice.

Steven Wu
Location:

Submitted At: 2:30pm 04-25-23
I am writing to express my STRONG OPPOSITION to the proposal of building a shelter place in our community.

This would have a negative impact on the safety and well-being of our community, especially for vulnerable populations such as children and the elderly. It could also have adverse effects on property values, local businesses, and tourism, which are crucial to our community's economic well-being.

Huan Li
Location:

Submitted At: 2:23pm 04-25-23
I strongly oppose this proposal! There are better approaches to help homeless individuals than constructing a low barrier shelter in an inappropriate location. Please hear our voices and take our concerns into account! Bin Xue
Location:

Submitted At: 2:20pm 04-25-23
I strongly oppose building the shelter at Benton, it’s too close to schools Brenda Earl
Location:

Submitted At: 2:18pm 04-25-23
As a resident of this community, I strongly oppose the construction of a low barrier homeless shelter in our community.

We do not welcome a low barrier (no background check) homeless shelter exist in our community with more than 10,000 children attending pre-school and elementary schools in our community. We need to make sure our community is safe.

We believe there are better locations other than our community to build the shelter.

Shilpa Bhat
Location:

Submitted At: 2:17pm 04-25-23
We strongly oppose to the Benton development. Pls cease project. It 1) Impacts Safety of residents
2) Safety of kids. Proximity to 10+schools & 7k+ school children (in 1.5 miles) 2022 Project HomeKey Report shared in Milpitas council meeting showed 3x crime increase Vs when the facility was a hotel.

Move shelter to a less residential area provide amenities/support to rehabilitate individuals. With our taxes tackle the root causes of homelessness through rehabilitation & address root cause Nis Naik
Location:

Submitted At: 2:11pm 04-25-23
Strongly oppose this project as a parent concerned about the safety of her young kids! Ying Xu
Location:

Submitted At: 2:10pm 04-25-23
I strongly oppose building a homeless facility at Benton!! Alex Wu
Location:

Submitted At: 2:08pm 04-25-23
As a resident of this community, I oppose the construction of a homeless shelter in our area. While I empathize with those experiencing homelessness and understand the need to provide support and assistance, I believe that building a shelter in our neighborhood would not be an effective solution. I worry about the potential negative consequences that a homeless shelter could bring, such as increased crime rates and decreased property values.

Vins Mittal
Location:

Submitted At: 2:08pm 04-25-23
Strongly Oppose.

People from all walks of life should be integrated in the mainstream to have access to basic needs such as food, shelter, clothing, etc. But, there has to be a process to do the same. To achieve such an objective, we can't have people with criminal background, substance abuse, etc. in a residential neighborhood with large number of schools in the vicinity!
Either the project's location should be changed or residents should be free of any criminal record / substance abuse.

Arun Sriraman
Location:

Submitted At: 2:08pm 04-25-23
I live in Sunnyvale less than half a mile from the proposed project location. I strongly oppose this proposal. A neighborhood with high density of residences, school and school age children is the worst possible choice for a low barrier housing project. Please consider a different non residential location.

Rui Diao
Location:

Submitted At: 2:05pm 04-25-23
Please read this report: https://www.mercurynews.com/2022/09/25/tiny-homes-and-homelessness-what-the-data- shows/
I don't see any reason why this project would do better.

WW Wu
Location:

Submitted At: 1:53pm 04-25-23
Strongly oppose this project. This is a huge safety issue for our neighborhood.

Carrie Wu
Location:

Submitted At: 1:52pm 04-25-23
I live in Santa Clara with my family. And I strongly oppose building a homeless facility near Benton. It is extremely unsafe for families nearby.

Hongtao Cheng
Location:

Submitted At: 1:52pm 04-25-23
I strongly oppose. As a concerned citizen, I am troubled by the lack of safe, affordable housing options for the homeless population in our community. Having spoken with some of the individuals who use our local homeless shelters, I have heard firsthand accounts of overcrowding, inadequate facilities, and limited access to basic necessities like food, clothing, and medical care. It is clear that the current situation is unacceptable and demands urgent attention.

Lucy Yin
Location:

Submitted At: 1:51pm 04-25-23
I STRONGL Y OPPOSE to this proposal!!! This location is too close to lots of schools with young kids. Building a sheltering house here definitely increases the safety concern to the neighborhood! Shruti Sharma
Location:

Submitted At: 1:51pm 04-25-23
We cannot support the low-income housing proposal in our neighborhood due to concerns about increased crime rates and the waste of taxpayer money. The proposed development lacks adequate security measures, which could result in a higher crime rate in our area. Additionally, the development would require significant investment of taxpayer funds for infrastructure improvements, which we believe could be better utilized elsewhere.

Sess Ken
Location:

Submitted At: 1:47pm 04-25-23
STRONGL Y oppose.

Danny Mass
Location:

Submitted At: 1:46pm 04-25-23
I'm strongly against the proposal as I have big concern about the potential safety impact to the community and the financial suspensibility of program. Please stop the project immediately from moving forward! Abby Ma
Location:

Submitted At: 1:40pm 04-25-23
I stronlgy oppose to setting up a shelter at Benson Street for a lot of reasons i can't even list out (mostly safety concerns, and potential very bad influence on the neighbourhood Please don't make decisions against the majority's will Chen Zhang
Location:

Submitted At: 1:37pm 04-25-23
Strongly opposite to building this shelter. A lot of schools near by. Very bad for those schools and kids.

Peggy Bu
Location:

Submitted At: 1:37pm 04-25-23
We OPPOSE the low-barrier interim housing proposed at Benton Street & Lawrence Expressway. There are many schools near location. We want a safe environment for our children!!! Kieky Cheng
Location:

Submitted At: 1:30pm 04-25-23
Without strict background check, this leads to a lot of safety concerns.

Ishani Bhatt
Location:

Submitted At: 1:20pm 04-25-23
Strongly oppose this project. This is a huge safety issue for our neighborhood.

Why can't we help homeless without ruining hardworking middle class people's neighborhood and lives.

Move it some other place,
Tom TH
Location:

Submitted At: 1:19pm 04-25-23
Strongly oppose it because
1 It’s Too close to multiple elementary schools
2 The serious lessons of deterioration of public safety surrounding the neighborhood after such shelter established in other locations
3 It won’t solve the homeless issues.

Solving homeless issues shouldn’t be done by sacrificing the stability and security of the existing neighborhood.

Boaz Ben-Zvi
Location:

Submitted At: 1:13pm 04-25-23
I strongly oppose this proposal. Building a homeless shelter at the busy intersection of Benton and Lawrence Expy would endanger those residing there and the local traffic. This shelter would only serve as a political cover up ("we fight homelessness") but not solve the related issues of drug abuse, poverty, and mental illness.

Amy Zh
Location:

Submitted At: 1:12pm 04-25-23
Please stop building homeless shelter and stop ruining our living environment Chenpeng Huang
Location:

Submitted At: 1:10pm 04-25-23
I oppose to building this shelter
Siddharth Sodhani
Location:

Submitted At: 1:06pm 04-25-23
I am opposed to the idea of low entry barrier for this housing. Can we please increase the background checks that needs to be performed?
Angel Wong
Location:

Submitted At: 1:05pm 04-25-23
Strongly Oppose! Kids are no safe, too close to schools and residential areas! Ross leoson
Location:

Submitted At: 1:00pm 04-25-23
Please don't build homeless shelter in City of Santa Clara.

Zhihao Ji
Location:

Submitted At: 12:56pm 04-25-23
As a local resident, I strongly oppose the proposal.

The construction cost is way too high, almost $1 million per family unit, and there's still the financial gap every year. That's totally a waste of tax money.

Also LifeMoves cannot show it can really help homeless people move to their next step. In MTV LifeMoves, success rate is only 26%!
So I believe, LifeMoves & County are not trustworthy partners to work with. Please reconsider this project and vote NO!!!
Richard Wen
Location:

Submitted At: 12:44pm 04-25-23
I STRONGL Y oppose this decision. As a resident of this area, I have seen firsthand the struggles that individuals experiencing homelessness face, and I believe that more needs to be done to address this urgent issue.

Research has shown that homeless shelters can lead to increased crime rates, decreased property values, and other issues that could harm our community. Therefore, I urge you to consider alternative solutions Bonnie Wishon
Location:

Submitted At: 12:38pm 04-25-23
I STRONL Y OPPOSE this proposal! As evidenced by the recent articles in the Mountain View Voice, LifeMoves' model has been shown to be ineffective and a waste of money. Most of their clients have not been able to find stable housing and many end up returning to homelessness.Our community has already taken on a fair share of the burden, and we cannot sustain anymore. City council members have a responsibility to represent the majority and make decisions that benefit the community as a whole.

Biao Wang
Location:

Submitted At: 12:29pm 04-25-23
Strongly opposed to build a homeless facility at Benton!!! There are many daycares, schools in this area. The non screen shelter can pose high risks to the children.

Please protect the children!
Joyce Huang
Location:

Submitted At: 12:25pm 04-25-23
I strongly oppose this Bento shelter. It is wasting tax payer’s money and attract more homeless here.

Ankit Thakral
Location:

Submitted At: 12:23pm 04-25-23
I strongly oppose this proposal as it will increase crime in the neighbourhood. I'm living in this neighbourhood for quite some time & crime has already been on rise. This will increase vandalism, drug problem in this area.

Maayan Segal
Location:

Submitted At: 12:21pm 04-25-23
I understand the good intention of this initiative, with that being said, I’m concerned that our kid’s safety is being compromised. I want my kids to feel comfortable and confident going to school or friends by themselves and this facility will definitely make me not allow them to do that.

As a neighborhood who is interested in attracting new young families, this act will do the opposite and harm our community.

Chuyao Cheng
Location:

Submitted At: 12:20pm 04-25-23
strongly oppose this shelter location! Bringing so many homeless to our neighborhood is just too much unknown and too many safe issues. Please listen to public voice on this! Santosh Singh
Location:

Submitted At: 12:15pm 04-25-23
I strongly OPPOSE 30-Unit Homekey Housing development proposal for a low barrier homeless shelter because of safety risk for the individuals living in neighborhood! Melody Rao
Location:

Submitted At: 12:09pm 04-25-23
I strongly oppose the 30-Unit Homekey Interim Housing program in our residential neighborhood due to safety concerns for our community and children, and the lack of transparency in its funding plan.

Seth Steingraph
Location:

Submitted At: 12:01pm 04-25-23
Please ask the people who support this proposal HOW CLOSE they live to this location. If they live very close and still support the project, then hats off to them. If, like me, they live a mile or more away, then take their comments with a grain of salt. It's very easy to claim the moral high ground when one is only minimally affected themselves; it's much harder when one has to actually deal with the consequences.

David Lu
Location:

Submitted At: 12:00pm 04-25-23
I'm living close to the Benton street. Santa Clara already has multiple similar facilities, there is already one just half a mile away. Enough is enough.

Eric Tong
Location:

Submitted At: 11:44am 04-25-23
I strongly oppose this proposal. As a resident living near the proposed site, I don’t feel safe for my kid and family considering the project is low barrier. The city should and could find a better place for this project Shraddha Desai
Location:

Submitted At: 11:42am 04-25-23
Two similar projects (Bella Vista and Benton) within a half mile of each other is not conducive to having a healthy environment.

Increase the percentage of low income units in all new developments to help improve housing conditions. That way those with limited means can be part of whole community and not live in projects that are seen as “less than”. Projects like these don’t help- they label people. We should help people assimilate.

Steven Chou
Location:

Submitted At: 11:38am 04-25-23
I strongly oppose the 30-Unit Homekey Interim Housing program in our residential neighborhood due to safety concerns for our community and children, and the lack of transparency in its funding plan.

Zoey Todorov
Location:

Submitted At: 11:34am 04-25-23
Both the old and new proposal failed to provide details for site design. No mention of fence, whether a controlled entrance or not, justification on parking and building hight. Also how do the 30 units look like? How many rooms? How do they come up the number of 120 people? How many kitchens? A proposal without details should only get an no for voting.

Nanxi Li
Location:

Submitted At: 11:31am 04-25-23
I STRONGL Y OPPOSE this proposal. The location is wrong, and LifeMoves is an unreliable partner to deliver success. It fails in all aspects: budget estimate, staff, service, execute policy, help homeless, manage neighborhood safety, and more.The comparable Milpitas project provides solid evidence on crime spike. The city is seeing striking crime statistics, with total police calls increasing by 300% and total fire calls by 400% in 2022.

We want a safe neighborhood!!!!!!!
Iris Chen
Location:

Submitted At: 11:30am 04-25-23
I oppose the Benton proposal for a low barrier housing project. It's really disappointing that the proposal has chosen this location, one of the last places that had community family events. Losing this valuable community gathering place would be a loss to our community.

Victoria Mallon
Location:

Submitted At: 11:29am 04-25-23
I oppose this proposal.The LifeMoves facility in Mt. View is an industrial area. The proposed facility for Santa Clara is surrounded by neighborhood and a number of schools which poses a significant public safety risk.

Additionally the idea that there will be no required screening or background checks of residents is not acceptable- this increases risk.It is a great hope of mine that the Council will listen to the neighbors and not just show the "hypocritical respect" and insincerity seen before.

Shalini Venkatesh
Location:

Submitted At: 11:23am 04-25-23
The number of unhoused people here is high and growing, with negative impacts for all of us. The current proposal would make a small but significant impact, as one piece of a larger regional and statewide approach to addressing the complex issues of the unhoused. The moral imperative for the City Council is clear. This is your chance to choose to do the right thing for the ENTIRE community. Y ou have a responsibility to all people living in this city, not just the ones currently in homes.

Kumar PK
Location:

Submitted At: 11:16am 04-25-23
I strongly OPPOSE this project! A low-barrier shelter is not acceptable in a thick residential area with lots of schools around. It would pose significant safety concerns to our community and children. Recommend finding a different site which will not pose safety concerns to the community.

Tianshan Cui
Location:

Submitted At: 11:13am 04-25-23
I strongly oppose for the Benton shelter project for the following reason: 1) the place is very important for the community. we love the place and we could like to continue celebrating different festivals with our neighbors. 2) there are so many schools/day cares nearby. the low barrier shelter will introduce lots of safety issues, especially for our kids. 3) I highly doubt the approach is a good way to solve the issue just by looking at the data & analysis in other sites managed by lifemoves
Anu TD
Location:

Submitted At: 11:10am 04-25-23
I strongly oppose this project due to safety concerns. The site chosen for this project is (1) Close to many schools and (2) near a dense residential area. Recommend choosing a different site which does not raise these sort of safety concerns to the community.

Jenny Shalev
Location:

Submitted At: 10:55am 04-25-23
I oppose Benton proposal because of safety risk for the kids in the neighborhood. My kids and their friends walk and bike in this area on a regular basis, please keep it safe. Not all parents can drive their kids and it's important to keep the area walkable and safe.

Mamatha K
Location:

Submitted At: 10:52am 04-25-23
Strongly oppose this proposal, Unsafe for neighborhood kids and seniors. Many schools are in close vicinity.

Potential risks in increased illegal activities and crime rates.

Rakhee Narsude
Location:

Submitted At: 10:31am 04-25-23
I strongly oppose this Benton proposal for homeless shelter. I am a Realtor and I already see my buyers are reluctant to buy a house in this neighborhood. I personally know about the proposal and I have to disclose it to my clients, and as soon as they hear about it, their decision changes.

Anshul Nigham
Location:

Submitted At: 10:18am 04-25-23
- Kids will lose the ability to walk to a neighborhood pumpkin patch, Christmas tree farm and other things during festival time; a treasured activity for our family and many others we know. - Admittance to the proposed shelter will not require any minimum bar, decreasing both perceived and perhaps actual general safety, leading to fewer residents, children and families being able to walk around the neighborhood
Larry Tsai
Location:

Submitted At: 10:11am 04-25-23
I am opposed to this proposal due to the impact it will have on the local neighborhood and safety concerns for children who live and attend school in the area.

ZHENG ZHAO
Location:

Submitted At: 9:50am 04-25-23
I strongly oppose Benton proposal for a low barrier homeless shelter because of safety risk for the kids in neighborhood!
Arun Kumar
Location:

Submitted At: 9:48am 04-25-23
I strongly oppose this Benton proposal for homeless shelter. This is a densely populated residential neighborhood with lots of kids and elder folks whose safety will at risk with this proposal. Please take a look at San Francisco and how bad it has become due to this.The home property values will drop rapidly and no one will buy houses in this locality. Homeless shelters belong at commercial real estate or Santa Clara fair grounds. Requesting the city council to vote against this Benton proposal
Hiya Le
Location:

Submitted At: 9:24am 04-25-23
County and LifeMoves are not acting in good faith. County tried to give vague details of compromised proposal in last meeting tried to take quick vote from public. County is provided misguided information to get more HomeKey points. Distance of nearest bus stop is shown form end of the lot not from entry door. Grocery shop mentioned in report is 7-11 which is not a grocery store as per HomeKey guidelines. Number of schools shown I county reports are less. They are making sure that Sobrato wins
sergey gorbunov
Location:

Submitted At: 9:13am 04-25-23
I strongly oppose Benton proposal for a low barrier homeless shelter. The homeless shelter will bring to our neighborhood drugs and related crimes, vandalism. It is deeply disappointing the city council has chosen to ignore and misunderstand our community concerns.
faina kantor
Location:

Submitted At: 8:53am 04-25-23
I am writing to express my strong opposition about the Benton proposal for a low barrier homeless shelter. The homeless shelter will bring to our neighborhood drugs and related crimes, vandalism.

It is deeply disappointing that the city council has chosen to ignore and misunderstand our community's concerns.

Megan Katz
Location:

Submitted At: 6:41am 04-25-23
I am curious did the people who support this plan really understand the proposal? There is so much misleading information in it. With simple logic you can see LifeMoves plan to move families from shelter A to B and pretend B is a family shelter. They will move families from B to C and turn B into a low barrier shelter for singles. They are playing a game to fool our government and public.

Susan Spade
Location:

Submitted At: 6:01am 04-25-23
After attending all community meetings and doing research into the proposed interim housing project I’m overwhelmingly OPPOSED to this project. I cannot understand why stacking containers on a highly populated/trafficked expressway is a solution to creating a safe and secure environment for the people who are experiencing being unhoused. Y ou can do better with finding a more suitable location for this project and not one that I will be looking out and seeing a 3 story monstrosity every day.

Duane Spade
Location:

Submitted At: 5:51am 04-25-23
Santa Clara resident for 59 years and I strongly OPPOSE this project. I live within 1000 feet of the project. This is a very congested traffic corridor. Directly across the street is a liquor store and 7-11? Lifemoves has already stated they want low-barrier, most challenging cases even though they don’t have the staffing to actively and effectively manage these sites.

I don’t trust you to have this cities best interests and either does the Grand Jury! Vote to OPPOSE this project! Ken Kratz
Location:

Submitted At: 12:58am 04-25-23
I live in a housing complex within ½ mile from the proposed project and I am a member of the Santa Clara Housing Advocates (SCHA) who support this project. The SCHA website lists the benefits of this project:
https://schousingadvocates.wixsite.com/benton.

I have lived in the neighborhood for 45 years and worked for the City as a Public Works Inspector for 30 years after attending U.C. Berkeley; my childhood family received government aid that prevented us from becoming homeless.

Siyu Hou
Location:

Submitted At: 12:50am 04-25-23
I strongly oppose the benton shelter project! I live in the Central Park neighborhood. It's unacceptable that our tax money would be spent in such a project that's is making our community worse and a lot more dangerous. There are lots of families with children living in this neighborhood. If this low-barrier shelter was built and a resident, could be kid, got hurt by people living in the shelter, would the initiator / manager / leader of this project be held responsible? Our lives matter too!
Allen Chin
Location:

Submitted At: 12:32am 04-25-23
I strongly oppose the proposal. Just look at the rising criminal rates near other homeless sites (e.g. MTV). I can't believe the high tax I've been paying is used for such a thing! The new proposal still doesn't add any screening and many safety concerns are still ignored. I'd recommend you stop wasting our time and withdraw the proposal completely. Go look at other sites further away from the residential area. Think more from our perspectives.

Everyone's life matters, not just those homeless
Feng Chen
Location:

Submitted At: 12:06am 04-25-23
I live in the santa clara area with my family (within 2-mile of the proposed shelter location). We strongly oppose the proposal!
William Yan
Location:

Submitted At: 12:02am 04-25-23
I strongly oppose this project. The safety concerns are huge. There are many schools and preschools in short distances from the proposed site. The shelter will attract more people with criminal history and people with addictions to the area. The potential risks to the children and residents nearby are unacceptable.

Sizhuo Zhang
Location:

Submitted At: 11:43pm 04-24-23
I strongly OPPOSE to this project! A low-barrier shelter is not acceptable in a residential area with schools around. It would pose significant safety concerns to our community.

The revisions of the proposal fail to address the fundamental concerns of the community. It's a complete waste of time and taxpayer's money.

Qing Sun
Location:

Submitted At: 11:30pm 04-24-23
I strongly oppose this project. The proposal with all the revisions is shortsighted without long term plan to address safety concerns raised by people who actually live in this community. Given the site is so close to many schools of young kids, this is unacceptable!
Subir Bhatt
Location:

Submitted At: 11:24pm 04-24-23
I oppose the project due to safety concerns that come with low barrier shelter with no background check for criminal or substance abuse. This site is in a well established residential area and close to 15 schools and many day cares. Statistics from similar sites in Milpitas and Mountain View show increase in crime rate and public service calls supported by police and fire department.

Geetha Rama
Location:

Submitted At: 10:59pm 04-24-23
I strongly oppose this. The one reason being my very young kids safety. They go to a schools and park nearby, a shelter without screening will be a big threat to them. We bought a home here keeping our kids safety and well being in mind, bringing this shelter here defies the purpose.

With this shelter here, we will lose our mental peace and our kids safety will our biggest worry.

Please have the shelter built in a commercial/downtown area which will be better for the homeless well being.

Ksenia Markina
Location:

Submitted At: 10:47pm 04-24-23
I can't believe they're even considering putting a homeless shelter right near the school in this nice neighborhood! This is a terrible idea! Think about the safety of the kids and the potential for increased crime rates. There's no way we should allow this to happen. People have worked hard to maintain a safe and prosperous community, and a homeless shelter here would only ruin it. There must be other places to build this shelter that won't destroy the quality of life which is hard to create
Pushpanjali Rao
Location:

Submitted At: 10:41pm 04-24-23
I strongly oppose this project. With majority of your citizens consistently opposing , I am not sure what else can be done to make city and county officials understand how this project impacts your tax paying residents safety & property prices. We already have examples how badly these projects have been failing( Milpitas being the latest example). Please do not make our kids the Guinea pigs in this social experiment in Santa Clara that is proven to Fail miserably in SF and other places.

Maxim Kukushkin
Location:

Submitted At: 10:40pm 04-24-23
Building a homeless shelter in our neighborhood may not be the most effective or beneficial solution. Alternative strategies, such as focusing on affordable housing options or tackling the root causes of homelessness, should be explored instead
Tatiana Lovetskaya
Location:

Submitted At: 10:35pm 04-24-23
There are valid concerns about safety and crime rates. While not all homeless individuals pose a risk, it is possible that the shelter could inadvertently attract individuals with criminal histories or drug addictions. This could lead to an increase in crime and negatively affect the sense of security in our neighborhood.

Linling He
Location:

Submitted At: 10:29pm 04-24-23
I oppose the project for the following reasons: 1. Unacceptable increase in crime rate and public service calls as supported by police and fire department data from other newly developed shelter sites; 2. Increase in drug use around facility and its negative influence on kids near by; 3. Environmental impact from the new construction and the operation of high density living units with no study done; 4. Questionable ability from Homekey to operate; 5.

Unclear funding for sustainability
Kirti Gokhale
Location:

Submitted At: 10:10pm 04-24-23
I strongly OPPOSE this proposal! I am a long time resident here and was leaving peacefully until now! This is so shocking to see the city is thinking to give a golden piece of land in the heart of the city to a homeless shelter!! This is a well established residential area no where close to any industrial area. How it can be a source of jobs? In fact, with the future existence of drug addicts or mentally ill leaving in the close proximity, we’re risking many lives of kids and adults! Realize !!!
George Kannathumadam
Location:

Submitted At: 10:07pm 04-24-23
Strongly disagree with the proposal. This proposal will not meet stated objectives because it fails to even nominally address causes of the problem at hand. This is an utter waste of time and taxpayer money Shyno George
Location:

Submitted At: 9:52pm 04-24-23
Poor use of taxes resulting in lower property values due to increased crime Connie Chou
Location:

Submitted At: 9:39pm 04-24-23
I strongly oppose this proposal. This is not a sensible location especially given proximity to dozens of schools and daycares. There has got to be better commercial locations for this type of housing where they are not in the middle of residences and can have better access to public transport and job opportunities! Zhanwei Xu
Location:

Submitted At: 8:42pm 04-24-23
strongly oppose! Residents need to be heard.

Kim Tanaka
Location:

Submitted At: 8:30pm 04-24-23
I Strongly Oppose this proposal. There are many children and schools in this area. The homeless cause the community environment to be messy, and even some homeless have drug issue or mental illness. Based on safety considerations, I T STRONGL Y OPPOSE!
Zongqiu Ai
Location:

Submitted At: 8:22pm 04-24-23
Strongly oppose. Strongly oppose. Strongly oppose.

Zheyu Wu
Location:

Submitted At: 8:13pm 04-24-23
I strongly oppose this project. This project itself doesn't make any sense as it didn't ask for residents' opinion to start with.

Yiming Xu
Location:

Submitted At: 8:12pm 04-24-23
I am a resident here in Santa Clara County. I STRONGL Y OPPOSED to this action as it will pose tremendous risk to the kids here.

Sumi Kamiya
Location:

Submitted At: 8:09pm 04-24-23
I wholeheartedly support this project. This will enrich our community and provide greatly needed support to the unhoused and help them get stable affordable housing.

I am shocked by the hurtful and discriminatory comments shared by many in opposition as seen by the misleading flyer found at my door.

Build this on an underutilized piece of property.

Aashi Verma
Location:

Submitted At: 7:39pm 04-24-23
I am in strong opposition of the homeless shelter because of the many safety concerns that come with it.

Naveen Yerneni
Location:

Submitted At: 6:45pm 04-24-23
I Strongly Oppose this proposal. The proposed location is in a residential area and next to bella vista shelter just 1500 mts away. The concentration of shelters in one area is concerning.The homeless folks do not live in the shelter all the time and instead roam around nearby neighborhoods creating nuisance. There are a lot of kids and schools in this area and this shelter would create safety issues as criminals might be housed in it. Please find a commercial location for this shelter
Mengyao Fu
Location:

Submitted At: 6:19pm 04-24-23
No low barrier shelter near my house!
Strongly NONONO!!!!
PLEASE LISTEN TO PEOPLE’S VOICE!!!

AMIT JAIN
Location:

Submitted At: 6:10pm 04-24-23
I strongly oppose this, this site is very near to two schools and Earl R. Carmichael Park on benton Street and this will impact the safety of residents which also include kids and elderly in the nearby areas on both sides of Lawrence.

Sathyashankar Nalka
Location:

Submitted At: 5:53pm 04-24-23
I strongly oppose the location Benton Street & Lawrence Expressway chosen for this project of low-barrier interim housing. There is overwhelming opposition to this location from community for valid reasons. There are enough vacant land in less populated nearby places. Why not county/city can find another location? Kuldeep Lonkar
Location:

Submitted At: 5:46pm 04-24-23
Strongly oppose!
Randy Liu
Location:

Submitted At: 5:34pm 04-24-23
Strongly opposed
Diane Harrison
Location:

Submitted At: 5:32pm 04-24-23
Please support this interim housing project; it is highly needed. Better yet, please restore the original proposal for up to 120 units; the need is far greater than only 30.

I am a senior who lives a few blocks away and does not fear poor people. I'd far rather give them a chance for hope and a better life.

Elsa Ken
Location:

Submitted At: 5:31pm 04-24-23
Strongly oppose!! Around my former home, there was a person with mental health issues in the neighborhood and often shouted aloud during the day. My kids were so scared and not willing to play outside of the house. This causes both mental and physical harms to my kids and forced me to move to the current home in Santa Clara.

The proposed unscreened shelter will likely have people with mental issue. That would be a serious threat to the safety and mental health of the kids in our community.

Liang Zou
Location:

Submitted At: 5:15pm 04-24-23
I STRONGL Y OPPOSE the plan to build the low-barrier interim housing proposed at Benton Street & Lawrence Expressway. The location is WRONG for this project. Other similar projects have already shown negative safety effects on nearby neighborhoods, so I don't think we should repeat the same error again. The location needs to be re-chosen.

Please listen to the voice of the public and reject the proposal. The community needs the exact same land for holiday events.

Jimmy Liu
Location:

Submitted At: 5:14pm 04-24-23
Strong OPPOSE! The city only informed the residents nearby this shelter. But I think the parents of the kids in nearby schools have the right to know this as well. They have the right to know what is the potential safety risks for their kids. And they have the right to say 'No!'
For example, the nearby Stratford school has open playground for kids (no gate at all). I can’t imagine what will happen if there are several homeless with mental health issues come to interrupt those kids! Greg Dacosta
Location:

Submitted At: 5:05pm 04-24-23
Strict "NO".

Pre-fabricated units are not acceptable. It may be acceptable of non-residential area - building must match character of residential neighborhood
No more than 2 stories - 3 stories will evade privacy of SF homes behind the creek Each unit much have full Kitchen and Bathroom - No shared Kitchenette so that facility can be converted to permanent or affordable housing when needed in future
It must be strictly and exclusively for families with children under 10 years of age

ADITYA BANSAL
Location:

Submitted At: 5:04pm 04-24-23
Strongly Oppose this proposal!!
I have been a resident of this neighborhood for more than 5 years. There are a lot of kids and schools in this area and it isn't the correct location for a homeless shelter. There is sufficient data that correlates such shelters to increased alcohol and drug usage in the area they are opened. Such an influence is not good for kids. Moreover, >300K visitors visit the activities that are hosted here every year so it would be a great loss for the community.

Bess Henderson
Location:

Submitted At: 4:29pm 04-24-23
We OPPOSE the low-barrier interim housing proposed at Benton Street & Lawrence Expressway.

This is the WRONG location, with such close proximity to 16 schools near by.

LifeMoves has very bad operating records for their existing shelters. Why build more failure? This proposed Benton/Lawrence land already has very important community function, visited by 300,000 local Santa Clara residents every year.

John Sontag
Location:

Submitted At: 4:12pm 04-24-23
As a 40+ year resident of Santa Clara, living in a home within sight of the proposed Interim Housing development, I applaud the city and county for working to actively support the unsheltered members of our community. We have seen the growth of the unhoused population in our area over the past decades, and wishing for a solution from somebody, somewhere else has not helped. I would much rather we reach out and help our neighbors in need than have them living at margin on our streets,
Mingmin Zhu
Location:

Submitted At: 4:11pm 04-24-23
Strongly opposed to build a homeless facility at Benton!!! There are many daycares, schools in this area. Even the kids always play around this area. The non screen shelter can pose high risks to the children and families. Please protect the children! Vinod Yadav
Location:

Submitted At: 4:09pm 04-24-23
I strongly oppose the proposed low barrier homeless shelter. Cause

1. Because of such a low barrier to entry the shelter, it will very difficult to avoid actual junkie and drug addicts in this facility and this area will become next SF . With 7 eleven so close to this facility, it is going to be hub for all the addicts and junkies making it super difficult and un safe of families around the area.

2.It's too close to a densely populated residential area

3. Too close to many schools, our next gen
Tianqi Liu
Location:

Submitted At: 3:38pm 04-24-23
Strongly oppose!!
Lakshmi Yarlagadda
Location:

Submitted At: 3:22pm 04-24-23
I strongly OPPOSE low barrier entry interim housing at Lawrence and Benton.

This site is:

1. Too close to multiple schools

2. Located in residential area
In addition, data shows that criminal rate increases near shelters. This project raises safety risks to children and seniors live in the community and children attend school here.

We strongly urge the city to decline this proposal and find another non-residential site like the way other cities did (Palo Alto, Mountain View, Redwood City...)
Chandra Maddipatla
Location:

Submitted At: 3:16pm 04-24-23
Strongly oppose low barrier entry interim housing at Lawrence and Benton. It is going to make the neighborhood very unsafe. The authorities havent been able to come up with a concrete workable plan to ensure safety of the peaceful neighborhood. This housing is going to increase the crime rate significantly and make lives of everyone around the neighborhood miserable. Do not build the low barrier entry interim housing at Lawrence and Benton. It will ruin the peaceful neighborhood permanently
Jitesh Jain
Location:

Submitted At: 3:15pm 04-24-23
This location is too close to so many schools. I
Jingni Zhong
Location:

Submitted At: 3:05pm 04-24-23
This poses so much risk to the kid s going to school and neighbors. The low/no barrier housing at such a dense residential community is such a terrible idea.

Do you what your kid be harassed while playing on lawn or commuting to and from school? Do you want to find needles and used syringe on street or in your front yard? Do you want your packages be taken again and again? Whoever making these proposals are clearly irresponsible.

Niranjan Manjunath
Location:

Submitted At: 2:41pm 04-24-23
There're 13 schools within a 1 mile radius. This proposal isn't safe for any kids in the community. Low entry housing barrier like this will only lead to increase in crime rate and make Santa Clara unsafe Piyush Tiwari
Location:

Submitted At: 2:39pm 04-24-23
This will lead to high increase in crime rate and it becomes very unsafe for kids Serena Young
Location:

Submitted At: 2:24pm 04-24-23
I live close by and I, as well as 5000 more other neighbors, strongly oppose this! We collected over 5000 opposed wet signatures and submitted them to the city clerk. Why is it not included in the report?? Megan Miller
Location:

Submitted At: 2:16pm 04-24-23
The location is not a good choice. As a low barrier emergency interim housing, we should choose a location like other sites which are surrounded by commercial/industrial buildings.

Jane Mark
Location:

Submitted At: 2:05pm 04-24-23
This brings safety concerns to the neighborhood
Mary S.

Location:

Submitted At: 1:50pm 04-24-23
I support housing for families at the Benton site. I do NOT like the idea of seeing a storage pod building from my condo.

Howard Yan
Location:

Submitted At: 1:28pm 04-24-23
This project does not consider the interests of local residents.

Qi Ren
Location:

Submitted At: 12:59pm 04-24-23
I strongly oppose to the Benton project. This site is:

1. Too close to multiple schools.

2. Located in residential area.

In addition, data shows that criminal rate increases near shelters.

This project raises safety risks to children and seniors live in the community and children attend school here.

We strongly urge the city to decline this proposal and find another non-residential site.

Dhruv Singh
Location:

Submitted At: 12:12pm 04-24-23
I strongly oppose this development which will have immediate negative impact on the qualify of the following

1. Kaiser hospital - expect unsafe and unfriendly conditions in a prime healthcare facility

2. Laurelwood and Dunford schools

3. Multiple residential apartment complexes that house children and families that attend the community public school
We strongly urge the city to find another location
Ada Yeung
Location:

Submitted At: 11:31am 04-24-23
I strongly oppose the proposed Benton development. The location of this shelter is a major safety threat to the community, particularly the children in the area. With over 15 schools and over 10 thousands of students in close proximity, the potential risks are too high to ignore. I urge the City Council to reconsider and find an alternative non-residential location and do not put our children at risk.

Taoran Lu
Location:

Submitted At: 11:15am 04-24-23
We have been living in Santa Clara for ten years. We strongly oppose this plan. It is not the right location for the homeless people we are trying to help with. The site is too close to Lawrence express way. There are barely no sidewalks and traffic speed usually can reach 60MPH. It puts their lives at risk considering they may have problem with alcohol and drugs so they may not control themselves as good as ordinary people when they walk on streets.

Xiao Yu
Location:

Submitted At: 10:59am 04-24-23
Strongly oppose this proposal. The county is trying to polish and rush the project. Low entry barrier beings serious risks to children and seniors in the neighborhood. Residents are deeply worried about the risk increased of increased crime and exposure to drugs, alcohol, etc.

Yao Wang
Location:

Submitted At: 10:54am 04-24-23
Oppose !!!
Wei Zhou
Location:

Submitted At: 10:37am 04-24-23
I strongly oppose this proposal, as it puts residents in the area in the risk without consideration This is such a misleading proposal without even enough homework being done. It includes tons of idealistic but unrealistic assumptions for the cost based on best case budget with super precise spending which we never see they made that before.

With all the data disclosed, it includes full of conditional statements which indicate that they plan to change it anytime
Jain Wu
Location:

Submitted At: 10:35am 04-24-23
I strongly oppose this project. As a Santa Clara resident living here for years and having multiple kids attending schools nearby, I am deeply worried about the safety of our next generation because of this project.

Hongliang Fei
Location:

Submitted At: 10:28am 04-24-23
Strongly oppose to build the shelter in a high density residential area. I believe that it is important to address the issue of homelessness, but I also believe that it is important to do so in a way that does not put the safety of our community at risk. I am not sure that a no-barrier shelter is the best solution for our community. I would like to see more research done on the effects of no-barrier shelters on crime rates and public safety.

Kim Jin
Location:

Submitted At: 10:26am 04-24-23
As a local resident and father of 2 young kids, I strong oppose this low entry barrier shelter in the neighborhood.

Kate Cao
Location:

Submitted At: 9:57am 04-24-23
As a local resident, I strongly oppose this project!!! Lifemove has no good track record to keep their promises such as 7/24 staff, case managers etc, they are really understaff , the local newspaper has 4 articles about Lifemove that they are understaffed, poor success rate to meet their promises and spent more much more money than planning!! How can you trust this kind of company? They have high turnover rate for their employees and the cost will be even more!!
Nataraj Batchu
Location:

Submitted At: 9:28am 04-24-23
I strongly oppose the proposed Homekey project. Its in middle of thick residential area with many schools around.

We are worried about the risk of increased crime, drugs which impacts children severely. Please find a place away from Schools.

Shaunak Chatterjee
Location:

Submitted At: 9:03am 04-24-23
I am strongly opposed to the current proposal as there are no adequate counter-measures to help the existing community feel safe. None of their valid concerns (as extensively voiced already in other comments) are addressed in the current proposal.

Pilar Furlong
Location:

Submitted At: 8:57am 04-24-23
Bill Wilson Center strongly supports the proposed Homekey project at Lawrence Exp. & Benton. For 50 years we have offered safe housing to homeless youth in Santa Clara. By providing 80 – 120 interim housing units that are near public transit and provide on-site supportive services (including case management to help with linkages to employment resources, education, and health care), the City is offering homeless individuals and families a safe place to stay while they rebuild their lives.

Vidushi Gupta
Location:

Submitted At: 8:47am 04-24-23
Unsafe for neighborhood kids, schools are in close vicinity. Potentially risks increase in illegal activities.

Neang Ly
Location:

Submitted At: 8:40am 04-24-23
We already have many Homekeys in the area and limited resources for police & security, as the policies do not respond even if we feel unsafe for individuals trespassing on our properties. My questions are:

1. Would you, as councilmembers be responsible for our community safety?

2. If safety issues arrive due to this, and with limited resources, who will be responsible? Would the council members be accountable for our financial loss or emotional damage due to this? Abhishek Gupta
Location:

Submitted At: 8:09am 04-24-23
Screening is a must for letting someone in.

Harini Va
Location:

Submitted At: 7:10am 04-24-23
Strongly oppose! The proposed plan and the few meetings I attended fail to convince me on the long term advantage of such a shelter in this neighborhood. With no proper screening and long term security measures in place, I’m hugely concerned about the safety of the vulnerable residents of such a low-barrier shelter along with the rest of the neighborhood. I urge my reps to strongly oppose this initiative and look at other ways to resolve homelessness.

Daniel Lin
Location:

Submitted At: 7:03am 04-24-23
I strongly oppose this proposal. Low entry barrier beings serious risks to children and seniors in the neighborhood. Parents of kids are worried about the risk increased of increased crime and exposure to drugs, alcohol, etc.

Jiatong Chen
Location:

Submitted At: 2:22am 04-24-23
The low barrier entry bar will bring drug addicts, mentally unstable homeless people to the scene, which will harm the safety of nearby neighborhoods, especially to children. It’s so close to so many schools, day cares. Such high density building will create traffic and parking problems as well. The noise from Lawrence will not be good for people with mental illness to live inside. Putting people with crime history in a high density building will make it a crime scene in the end.

Jack Auff
Location:

Submitted At: 1:29am 04-24-23
Oppose! Community concerns are being ignored despite schools and parks within 2000 ft. of the proposed housing site and the lack of background checks for residents. "Family only" doesn't guarantee safety. Feedback cards are selectively considered, excluding emails after March 21st. A new proposal has been presented and put to vote, disregarding previous engagement meetings. Council members deny involvement in the county project and officials coach students to speak in support of it.

Neil Arsul
Location:

Submitted At: 1:23am 04-24-23
I strongly oppose the proposed shelter in Benton. It's too close to residential areas, schools, and community hubs, and could increase crime rates and harm children. The lack of screening for occupants is a safety risk, and the unclear funding and inability to ensure building standards are met are concerning. This proposal is not a solution to homelessness and would sacrifice the safety of the community.

Swapnil Harsule
Location:

Submitted At: 1:10am 04-24-23
I strongly oppose this proposal. The county is trying to rush the project. Low entry barrier beings serious risks to children and seniors in the neighborhood. Parents of kids are worried about the risk increased of increased crime and exposure to drugs, alcohol, etc.

Neelima Yenigalla
Location:

Submitted At: 12:31am 04-24-23
Strongly oppose the location for the proposed project. Idea to help homeless persons is welcome but the place is not right. In my work I see lot of homeless people that say there is rampant drug use in these kind of places. With so many schools close by, not safe. Please find a place away from schools and thickly populated residential units.

Reena Gupta
Location:

Submitted At: 12:04am 04-24-23
I strongly oppose this project due to to its location close to residential community and many schools in the near vicinity. I’d be highly concerned about safety and security of our children and families. If city would like to provide a shelter for homeless, keep it outside of the city and give them appropriate rehabilitation and work opportunities.

Puxiao Han
Location:

Submitted At: 11:58pm 04-23-23
I strongly oppose to this proposal as it will make our neighborhoods not safe anymore.

Mengqi Ren
Location:

Submitted At: 11:52pm 04-23-23
Strong NO to this proposal. It is too close to residential area which will raise crime rate and damage the community. Sacrifice other people’s safety is not the way to solve homelessness problem! Enlin Wang
Location:

Submitted At: 11:14pm 04-23-23
Oppose this proposal. There are many schools around this area. Without screening the shelter residents, it’s irresponsible for the kids. If anything happen to the kids because of this, will city take full responsibility? Pedro Ta
Location:

Submitted At: 11:07pm 04-23-23
I oppose this proposal. Allowing occupants who have not been screened, particularly those with criminal records, could create safety concerns for the area.

Hui Zhuo
Location:

Submitted At: 10:38pm 04-23-23
Strong oppose! Low barrier, no screening; occupants with drug addiction, criminal records, sex offenders Benton location is a bustling community hub attracting 3,000+ families yearly Over 11k families are at risk; similar sites experienced a rise in police calls A second shelter opened 0.5 miles away
Shen Yu
Location:

Submitted At: 10:34pm 04-23-23
I strongly oppose this proposal. It poses risks to the community's safety as a low barrier shelter, is based on unrealistic assumptions for funding and construction, and would take away an irreplaceable community hub.

Alick Wang
Location:

Submitted At: 10:25pm 04-23-23
Strong No from my side! The City keeps on calling the Benton location a "vacant land," but it is one of the last few community hubs that local families use to celebrate holiday traditions. In addition, there're thousands of households nearby, plus quite a few schools or kindergartens that students or kids go to every day. Has the city considered the safety of our next generations?
Joe Fincutter
Location:

Submitted At: 10:22pm 04-23-23
As of today 4/23/2023, I am opposed to the project as proposed. My primary concerns are:

1. Candidates for the interim housing are wide open exposing the community to high repeat offenders:
a. Child abuse
b. Violent actors (drug and mental health issues, jailed for violence)

2. Funding is vague and open ended.

3. Homekey funding eliminates ability to assure normal building standards are met (i.e. earthquake standards).

Haomin Guo
Location:

Submitted At: 10:21pm 04-23-23
If the city continues with the project at this location, it is putting the church children next door in danger by placing them among psychologically disturbed adults. I am opposed! Ying Liu
Location:

Submitted At: 10:15pm 04-23-23
I strongly oppose this proposal. Building a homeless shelter so close to a busy traffic street, schools, and residential areas is not safe at all for everyone.

Brian West
Location:

Submitted At: 10:01pm 04-23-23
We, as residents of the neighborhood near Benton & Lawrence, are strongly opposed to the proposed Benton/Lawrence homeless shelter. This radical idea of placing homeless shelter in middle our residential communities is SICK, to say the lease. We urge you to Vote NO! Stop this insane proposal.

Taimei Yeh
Location:

Submitted At: 9:55pm 04-23-23
I strongly oppose the projected site at Benton and Lawrence. Simply because children safety and sever short of parking for the next door.

Ezra Yeung
Location:

Submitted At: 9:38pm 04-23-23
Where do city plan to find an open lot at the site to accommodate 50 plus more cars for next door church lease parking?
Therefore, I strongly oppose building this homeless shelter at this location between Benton and Lawrence.

Shu Ch
Location:

Submitted At: 9:29pm 04-23-23
As Santa Clara residents, our family strongly oppose this proposal.

1. LifeMoves' approach of sheltering has a low success rate of helping homeless and achieving their promises.

2. There was no actionable plan for this construction that was properly communicated with the neighborhood community. Throughout past 4 meetings, the details of this site kept changing.

3. There is strong opposition to this from residents nearby (in the last zoom, 80% of attendees vote no).

Please hear us and vote no!
Hanting Yeh
Location:

Submitted At: 9:24pm 04-23-23
City is putting the next door church children in danger by immerse church children among psychologic problematic people if city insists with the project at this site. I oppose! Qingyi Liu
Location:

Submitted At: 8:42pm 04-23-23
Strong NO. This project must be stopped.

1. There are ~10 schools within 1 mile. A low barrier shelter put so many children's safety at risk. Parents are concerned.

2. Even school teachers cannot afford to live in this area. Why get a low barrier homeless shelter first?

3. Listen to the people. If a public hearing does not listen to the public, what is the sense of doing this? Remember the power is given by the people. The money is given by the tax payers. Don't spend our money against us!
Leon Liang
Location:

Submitted At: 8:29pm 04-23-23
Strong NO. This project must be stopped.

1. There are ~10 schools within 1 mile. A low barrier shelter put so many children's safety at risk. Parents are concerned.

2. Even school teachers cannot afford to live in this area. Why get a low barrier homeless shelter first?

Submitted At: 8:27pm 04-23-23
The proposed shelter is a sham and a waste of our tax funding, I stead of finding a solution to homelessness, the career bureaucrats have resorted to just trying to win tax funding without considering the long term funding requirements and wether LifeMoves is qualified to even run these shelters. Recent study have found LifeMoves is squandering our hard earned tax dollars by failing the homeless shelter residents. Not only that they pay excessive CEO bonus. This is an absolute no.

Yiran Yan
Location:

Submitted At: 7:45pm 04-23-23
I strongly oppose this project.

A low barrier intrim housing project should not be located the a residential area and so close to so many schools.

And there was a very similar project proposed at White Oak Lane. It didn’t pass because it’s not financially feasible and would be too close to a high-speed intersection.

The Lawrence & Benton site is similarly close to the high-speed intersection. And it would cost more than 10 million dollars annually on operation.

This project should be stopped.

Connie Zhang
Location:

Submitted At: 7:36pm 04-23-23
I strongly oppose Benton shelter, it causes a serious risk to local residents and schools! In previous poll during hearing, there’s clearly 80%+ oppose this shelter proposal, it’s a wrong location! Please listen to your people and your voters and vote NO to this shelter!
Frey Zhou
Location:

Submitted At: 7:21pm 04-23-23
80-95% local residents opposed this proposal in the most recent zoom meeting. These shelters should never be built in the residential area.

Rachel Zhang
Location:

Submitted At: 7:13pm 04-23-23
The location has a serious safety risk to the neighborhood. We shouldn’t put our children at risk. A big NO to this project!
Narayan Chalasani
Location:

Submitted At: 6:31pm 04-23-23
A strong NO to this project. It poses a major safety and security concern for the area.

Youyou Tan Tan
Location:

Submitted At: 5:59pm 04-23-23
This location is a joke. Mountain View site is under staff because they can not afford live nearby. We should spend our money more wisely.

Gajra Sinha
Location:

Submitted At: 4:57pm 04-23-23
A strong NO to this project. It poses a major safety and security concern for the area. It is close to major expressway, schools, single family homes and above all next to the gas station and liquor store.

Piyush Agarwal
Location:

Submitted At: 4:51pm 04-23-23
As a local resident, I vehemently oppose this project, and urge city council members to please consider the safety of all us residents and their families including children of all ages. Do the council members not desire safety of us residents? It is shocking that this is still being considered.

I urge that we all collectively vote "NO" on this project to save this neighborhood and community. None of us will forget the callous attitude on display should this project go ahead.

Hardik Darji
Location:

Submitted At: 4:49pm 04-23-23
Homeless shelter near my home is harmful for my family. I strongly oppose it Saurabh Sinha
Location:

Submitted At: 4:46pm 04-23-23
As a resident of Santa Clara for last 15+ years, I strongly oppose the project because it will increase safety and security of the neighborhood. I rather do a project for affordable housing for school teachers and other govt. officials.

The Project site is so close to major traffic cross roads and near schools poses enhanced security and safety issues for the community. Please say NO to this project.

Ryan Komand
Location:

Submitted At: 4:31pm 04-23-23
As a local resident, I strongly oppose this project, and urge city council members to vote NO on this project. My points are below:

1. From 4 community meetings, we didn't get any concrete plan about this shelter, which really disappointed me.

2. According to recent news about LifeMoves Palo Alto and LifeMoves Mountain View, I don't think LifeMoves is a trustworthy partner to build or operate ANY shelter.

Please vote "NO" on this project. Or it will definitely be a disaster to the community Lakshmi Vaidyanathan
Location:

Submitted At: 4:31pm 04-23-23
I strongly oppose to the proposal. It is going to make the neighborhood extremely unsafe with several schools in the vicinity.

Lu Peng
Location:

Submitted At: 4:03pm 04-23-23
I strongly oppose the proposal due to the concern for safety of my children who attend Monticello Academy nearby.

Yangyang Sun
Location:

Submitted At: 3:59pm 04-23-23
I am deeply concerned about the interim housing at Benton. I have two kids in the school within 1 mile. My concerns are:

1. Lack of adequate security measures for the safety of the children attending elementary school. This includes security cameras, trained security personnel, and strict policies/vetting on the resident in the shelter.

2. The children may not fully understand the concept of homelessness and could be frightened or disturbed by seeing homeless individuals on a regular basis.

Rose Joseph
Location:

Submitted At: 3:35pm 04-23-23
Oppose Benton shelter

1. Our kids need a safe neighborhood, not one where they have to look over their shoulders while walking to school or playing at the park. Without adequate background checks in place, the shelter is inviting addicts and criminals into the neighborhood.

2.I fail to understand how the shelter can help addicts when there is a liquor store at the doorstep of the proposed site. What they need is rehabilitation.

3.Please find a location outside of residential neighborhood.

Amrutha kollipara
Location:

Submitted At: 3:20pm 04-23-23
As an eighth grade student with a younger brother, I strongly oppose this idea. The neighbors living in the neighborhood are parents of young kids, putting their safety at risk. I sympathize with the ones living with poverty, however, putting others’ life at risk is not okay. My school is next to the proposed site as well as many others including preschools and daycares. This is why I am in strong opposition of this idea. Thank you.

Chaitanya Banda
Location:

Submitted At: 3:18pm 04-23-23
I strongly oppose the construction at this location. I am concerned about the safety. My kids go to school near by and now I don’t feel safe for them to walk home or play around the neighborhood. When my parents visit, the only excitement here for them apart from spending time with us is to walk around as they can’t drive. With this, i fear safety for them too. Don’t make this neighborhood desolated. Please keep it cheerful as it is now. Thank you.

Sonia Singhal
Location:

Submitted At: 3:01pm 04-23-23
I have voted yes on every tax increase, welfare program & wage increase. But this proposal has so many issues.

First bucketing mentally disable, substance abuse, criminals into same bucket as homeless is wrong. All need help but in different ways. Whats more disturbing is the data coming from existing sites on failed programs & increase in crime. If I have tell my kids that their beloved pumpkin patch is closed & also that you cant go out on streets anymore, there is something seriously wrong.

Chao Wang
Location:

Submitted At: 2:56pm 04-23-23
It is deeply disappointing that the city council has chosen to ignore and misunderstand our community's concerns.

Even more disheartening is the fact that the council has put forth a totally new proposal right before the voting date, which after a mere glance, is full of misleading information, inconsistent wordings, and ambiguous descriptions. This is totally unacceptable.

We want to make it abundantly clear that we will not tolerate any attempt to mislead or deceive us.

Selvi Ponniah
Location:

Submitted At: 2:53pm 04-23-23
Wrong location for the propose of low barrier entry facility. Safety and security implications are huge given the neighborhood with lots of schools and kids .

Daniel Wang
Location:

Submitted At: 2:46pm 04-23-23
I strongly oppose this proposal for three reasons. Firstly, there are already many schools located within one mile of this site. Secondly, there is already a homeless shelter located within half a mile of the proposed site, and it is not appropriate to build two shelters in such close proximity in a single neighborhood. Finally, the background check protocol for this shelter is not clear to all, which raises concerns about the safety of the community.

Therefore, I strongly oppose this proposal.

Yanhong Zhao
Location:

Submitted At: 2:42pm 04-23-23
Strong oppose. Please find a non-residential neighborhood for this project. There are so many schools, day care in this neighborhood.

Madhu Sridhar
Location:

Submitted At: 2:42pm 04-23-23
I oppose this because of the location. This is not appropriate for a residential neighborhood and in the vicinity of schools.

Ann Jo
Location:

Submitted At: 2:30pm 04-23-23
I oppose this project due to its location. Please find an alternative nonresidential neighborhood for this project.

Mudita singhal
Location:

Submitted At: 2:24pm 04-23-23
Incompetent decision and choice to think that a heavily residential working class neighborhood with kids walking alone from several schools in the area is the best choice for a low barrier to entry shelter. Strongly oppose. Y ou CAN do better. Y ou SHOULD do better!!
Fred Deng
Location:

Submitted At: 2:17pm 04-23-23
Strongly oppose to Benton shelter. This residential neighborhood is surrounded by so many schools, daycares and is also next to a high-speed intersection. There're so many reasons to show that this is obviously a WRONG location for a shelter. Please vote NO and find non-residential parcels to go ahead with this proposal.

Shuyang Cheng
Location:

Submitted At: 2:11pm 04-23-23
Wrong location. I strongly oppose to this proposal and have concerns about the safety of the students or the residents in the surrounding area if the project gets passed. Any politicians who vote Y es should step down and they will.

Yuanzhe Han
Location:

Submitted At: 2:01pm 04-23-23
I oppose for the safety of our children.

Tianqi Wang
Location:

Submitted At: 1:28pm 04-23-23
Strongly oppose to Benton shelter. Very concerned about the public safety with an unvetted shelter inside neighborhood and close to schools.

Amy Ho
Location:

Submitted At: 1:08pm 04-23-23
_________________________Oppose Benton Shelter
My name is Amy, resident of Santa Clara. I strongly oppose Benton shelter. This is the wrong location. I urge you to cease consideration of this location, and vote no as our representative. City and county need to find a non- residential land for the facility like this.

I’m counting on you.

Weiyi Liu
Location:

Submitted At: 1:07pm 04-23-23
Too close to schools and homes. 5000+ petitions with wet signatures to veto this proposal were collected, but county just blatantly ignored them. The game is rigged.

Birdland JM
Location:

Submitted At: 12:58pm 04-23-23
Without strict vetting and background screening, the uncontrolled accommodation of the homeless will cause safety issues for nearby residents. Therefore I strongly oppose this project L. H.

Location:

Submitted At: 12:16pm 04-23-23
As a local resident, I strongly oppose the Benton project. Homekey's two fundamental principles, "Housing First" and "Low Barrier," are flawed and ineffective in solving homelessness while posing serious safety risks to nearby neighborhood. Without background check, is it even going to be safe for the children in the shelter?! There are many false statements in the proposal, e.g. 63% found permanent housing, immediate eviction, no shortage of police force, etc.

Citycouncil, please vote NO!
SE Birdland
Location:

Submitted At: 12:05pm 04-23-23
‘We can’t put the shelter on other county land because THEY ARE PARKS’, according to Ms Hernandez. It won’t serve Santa Clara’s ’250 unsheltered’. It’ll serve the developers & nonprofits. They’ll place anyone the county chooses to place there. San Jose has 7000 (65%) of the homeless; Santa Clara has less than 250 (3%). Y ou are pushing out your very diverse, middle income constituents. No other city puts shelters in a neighborhood, except San Jose or LA. And more Brown act violations, again!
Anjali Surapaneni
Location:

Submitted At: 12:03pm 04-23-23
I strongly oppose this shelter at this this location. We cannot have a low barrier shelter so close to families and schools. No background checks are not acceptable when it comes to safety of our families. The solution today looks more of a “ bait and switch” tactic to coerce a yes out of residents. Please consider voting NO. County cannot push us to accept something unsafe for our families on our tax paying $. Don’t lead Santa Clara to path of destruction like San Francisco.Please vote NO!
Rui Zhang
Location:

Submitted At: 12:01pm 04-23-23
City council just ignore majority neighbors strong opposition, Neelu Kumawat
Location:

Submitted At: 11:57am 04-23-23
All the council members who have the power to vote, please know the whole community is depending on you and that your decision will impact the daily lives of all of us. God forbid, if there happens a single incident because of your decision, you’ll have to live with it forever. Please cast your vote responsibly.

Gautam Kulkarni
Location:

Submitted At: 11:55am 04-23-23
Strongly oppose. It is appalling that the city/county would consider putting a low-barrier homeless shelter in a family neighborhood with so many children and schools in close proximity. The planners/representatives have displayed a cavalier attitude towards safety concerns raised by hardworking, tax-paying citizens. Moreover, the financial aspects have not been shared. We will hold you accountable for the inevitable crime wave. We will recall officials if needed - we have the numbers.

Alex Wang
Location:

Submitted At: 11:48am 04-23-23
Strongly oppose. This is not a right location where it’s close to many schools, daycares and next to a high speed intersection. No transparency in financial status. The attempt to attract more homelessness to our neighborhoods is intolerable. No proper arrangements for those who got released or kicked out from the site. They can and will continue to stay nearby.

Notice people who support are mostly not living nearby. They are exploiting our safety to reach their “honorable” intends.

Yuan Yao
Location:

Submitted At: 11:44am 04-23-23
Strong oppose this bill, I am a father of two. My kid live and go schools in here. This development will definitely make this area unsafe
Yi Du
Location:

Submitted At: 11:39am 04-23-23
I strongly oppose this proposal. Overwhelmingly majority residents have said repeatedly no homeless shelter in residential area ever. If city members ignore residents interests and harm children’s safety, be prepared to face electoral and legal consequences.

Mahendra Chaudhari
Location:

Submitted At: 11:38am 04-23-23
I strongly oppose this.I understand we all needs to do something to address homelessness, and willing to discuss/brainstorm for alternative solutions. This site isn’t ideal for homeless shelter for many reasons. Please consider to vote NO on this. Instead build low income housing, facilitate classes for kids in low income families.

Some of us, who lives in this neighborhood can probably volunteer to teach kids robotics, programming, etc. It can prepare kids for better employment opportunities
vivian zhang
Location:

Submitted At: 11:36am 04-23-23
I strongly oppose the proposed homeless shelter. This is a horrible plan and the city is trying to bypass the residents to sneak through. shame on you!
Jie Han
Location:

Submitted At: 11:29am 04-23-23
No low barrier shelter near our kids!
BJ Huang
Location:

Submitted At: 11:28am 04-23-23
I strongly oppose the proposed homeless shelter at Benton and Lawrence.

It is WRONG to place a homeless shelter in a residential community with so many K to 12 schools so close to the proposed location.
raymond chang
Location:

Submitted At: 11:28am 04-23-23
I strongly oppose the location. this was a family activity location for holidays. My kids goes to school around this area. The city does not listen. Next election we will vote them out.

David Tran
Location:

Submitted At: 11:17am 04-23-23
I live in the neighborhood and I strongly oppose the proposed location of this shelter. It’s so close to residential communities and many schools. I empathize with helping those in need but there are better locations. Trying to fulfill a state mandate against the will of the residents is appalling (80% opposition in community meetings) and brings to question the legality if this passes.

Shame on the city.

We responsible citizens who the city claims to represent deserve better.

Harsha Vashisht
Location:

Submitted At: 11:07am 04-23-23
Strongly oppose the location. Residential neighborhood surrounded by so many schools is not a good location for low barrier housing. Safety is a very big concern. The concerns of the community have been downplayed and feels like the stakeholders want to go ahead in spite of the strong push back. Please find non residential parcels to go ahead with this proposal. Use this site to build longterm housing for our first responders, teachers and retail workers.

Deepak Rama
Location:

Submitted At: 11:06am 04-23-23
Horrible planning. No financial viability. Huge security risks for neighborhood. No respect for taxpayers and voters. Proximity to schools, liquor stores and disruption to peaceful neighborhood. Expressway close by poses risk to ppl living in proposed site. Low barrier entry and lack of proper planning. Collusion with life works! Yuan Tian
Location:

Submitted At: 10:59am 04-23-23
I live in walking distance to this location and know how many schools and kids are nearby. Strongly oppose this location! There needs to be a more careful assessment on the location and screening policy.

Melissa Lee
Location:

Submitted At: 10:52am 04-23-23
Strong oppose! Low barrier, no screening; occupants with drug addiction, criminal records, sex offenders Benton location is a bustling community hub attracting 3,000+ families yearly Over 11k families are at risk; similar sites experienced a rise in police calls A second shelter opened 0.5 miles away
LifeMoves is poorly staffed, low success rate in permanent housing, and location far from public transit, grocery, jobs
False data was presented, no integrity!
Politically motivated supporters.

Darshana Parmar
Location:

Submitted At: 10:50am 04-23-23
- We demand full CEQA evaluation before city provides HomeKey support letter for application - Financing details are still not exposed. Homekey 3.0 requires city to operate for 30 years. How city will support once funding runs out without creating burden on tax payers - We must preserve this last community resort
- Facility is NOT exclusive for families with children. Last minute slipping in provision to house adults only - Without BC check, sec offenders can’t be identified. Megan’s law violat Tammy Wang
Location:

Submitted At: 10:47am 04-23-23
I live in the neighborhood and I strongly oppose the proposed location of this shelter. It’s inappropriate to build a shelter so close to residential communities and many schools Anwesa Chatterjee
Location:

Submitted At: 10:43am 04-23-23
As a concerned resident, I cannot support the implementation of a low barrier homeless shelter in our neighborhood. The shelter will attract drug users and criminals, increase crime rates, and decrease property values. I fear that this decision was made without considering the impact on our community. Let's work together to find a solution that benefits everyone and keeps our community safe and thriving.

Anunay Bhatt
Location:

Submitted At: 10:41am 04-23-23
I and my family strongly oppose this proposed shelter location. We support homelessness and agree that they need housing. But this location has many families and children which makes it a poor choice for the low-barrier shelter. Instead of further developing the area, this is a retrograde step for the hard-working, tax paying residents of Santa Clara city. County should instead consider other non-residential parcels with good public transit access for this cause.

SCC Safe
Location:

Submitted At: 10:32am 04-23-23
SafeSCC promotes safe neighborhoods and has sent 7 documents to the city clerk for public agenda inclusion, but they were not added:
1-3. Three open letters to city council oppose Benton project - 3/9, 3/13, 4/11

4. 5293 Petition Submission Cover Letter - 4/14

5. 10 Essential Facts to Know Before 4/25 vote

6. 10 Reasons Why Everyone Should Oppose Benton Shelter

7. "LifeMoves MTV promises to help homeless clients find stable housing in three months. The majority of them don't" Palo Alto Online
Sharon Shaon
Location:

Submitted At: 10:24am 04-23-23
As a Santa Clara resident, I oppose the proposed location for a low-barrier, no screen check homeless shelter.

Over 80% of residents opposed it, but the government ignores us. The Bella Vista location is only 0.5 miles away and too close to residential areas and a nearby school. Find a more appropriate location.

Dhvani Desai
Location:

Submitted At: 10:14am 04-23-23
This is not a appropriate place as it's in middle of residential and school area and the occupants in this temporary dwelling are ex felony and mental health concern individuals which can endanger kids walking to schools Stephen Yang
Location:

Submitted At: 10:06am 04-23-23
I live within 3 miles of the site and my kids go to the laurelwood elementary school, which is within 2 miles of the place. Given the data showing the crime rates and 911 calls go up once a no screening interim housing shows up and common sense, I strongly appose the plan. It is not the right place to build the facility and right way to solve the homeless issue. I really doubt the motivations of the supporters and city council members who proposed the plan.

Vishal Tanna
Location:

Submitted At: 9:58am 04-23-23
Strongly oppose. LifeMoves is a horrible choice.
- Tricked Palo Alto city council by doubling construction budget after approval. Now reducing services promised to homeless clients
- MV site, previous to directors had criminal history and stole - Benton site, slipped in last minute change to make provision to house single adults as well - Previous MV site residents told stories about mismanagement, ill treatment in MV voice articles - Qualification for case manager is highschool diploma
Ashish Verma
Location:

Submitted At: 9:31am 04-23-23
I strongly oppose this proposal. Housing folks wothout even a background check where data suggests presence of convicts, felons, sex offenders in such proximity to residential neighborhoods is beyond comprehension to tax paying residents who foot the bill eventually. Please listen to your residents. If you impose this on us, you are severly impacting safety and pursuit of happiness for more than 5000+ of your residents directly. Who is accountable? The folks who vote yes to this?
Xufei Wang
Location:

Submitted At: 9:27am 04-23-23
I strongly oppose the Benton Shelter Proposal. I have been a Santa Clara for over 10 years. Over the years, I observed, reported, and in person experienced more and more crimes: my neigbors’s cars were broken into, my bikes got stolen, even my home was attempted to break in march. We paid tons of tax each year, the government should at least make sure we live in a safe place called home.

We are equally important as those who need a home. why should we live in fear? Jenny Zhang
Location:

Submitted At: 9:23am 04-23-23
I live in Santa Clara, and I strongly oppose this project. The low barrier shelter with no-screening will collect lots of drug addicts and criminals. The shelters in Milpitas and Palo Alto have proved this point. The wrong location in a neighborhood with so many schools and daycares will result in serious safety concern. In last city council meeting, some opposers offered a few alternative spots for this housing project. Please carefully consider these proposals.

Jaccard Pan
Location:

Submitted At: 9:15am 04-23-23
I strongly opposes the Benton Shelter Plan because LifeMoves has a very bad record of running homeless shelters in nearby cities. Do you know 74% of their clients are still homeless after existing LifeMoves' shelter, because they cannot get quality service from there? They don't even feel safe there. Do you know LifeMoves doubled the cost estimate of their existing shelter within a year of approval? The unreasonable cost overrun indicates LifeMoves are losing control of their project.

Joe Cheng
Location:

Submitted At: 8:52am 04-23-23
I live in Santa Clara and my family and I strongly oppose this shelter proposal because it is not safe! Lisa Eckstein
Location:

Submitted At: 7:33pm 04-22-23
I strongly support the interim housing to be built at Benton and Lawrence. I've been a Santa Clara homeowner for over 20 years. I live near Stevens Creek Boulevard and San Tomas, a part of our city where many people live on the street. I applaud Santa Clara for addressing our local homelessness crisis by providing more safe housing and much needed resources. If you can find an additional spot for a similar housing project in my neighborhood, I'd support that as well.

Agenda Item: eComments for REPORTS OF MEMBERS AND SPECIAL COMMITTEES Overall Sentiment
BJ Huang
Location:

Submitted At: 2:19pm 04-25-23
I STRONGL Y OPPOSE.

The homeless are free to go in and out of the shelter. With the concentration of 200 plus "most challenging homeless", many no doubt with drug additions at this location, drug dealers will be attracted to come; it is well documented a concentration of homeless will attract drug dealers, as in Tenderloin, San Francisco. How many additional police officers are assigned to this precinct, dedicated to the “low barrier interim homeless shelter? Ying Xu
Location:

Submitted At: 2:14pm 04-25-23
This is a huge safety issue for our neighborhood!
I STRONGL Y OPPOSE building a homeless facility at Benton!! Agenda Item: eComments for CITY MANAGER/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REPORT Overall Sentiment
Ying Xu
Location:

Submitted At: 2:15pm 04-25-23
This is a huge safety issue for our neighborhood!
I STRONGL Y OPPOSE building a homeless facility at Benton!! SE Birdland
Location:

Submitted At: 5:35pm 04-23-23
"The proposed site is vacant land located at the intersection of Lawrence Expressway and Benton Street near the Santa/Clara Sunnyvale border." The county sat on this land for the benefit of certain developers (and to leverage fed/state funds) rather than making it available years ago for housing tech workers, public employees, and service workers who sit in traffic for 4 hours a day. Or to provide a county parkland for local residents like the many county parks in other cities.

Agenda Item: eComments for ADJOURNMENT
Overall Sentiment
BJ Huang
Location:

Submitted At: 2:28pm 04-25-23
We OPPOSE the proposed low barrier interim homeless shelter at Benton and Lawrence.

Mayor Gilmore, City Councilmembers: Just say NO.

Vote NO on this proposal, as the Representatives of this Great City.

Ying Xu
Location:

Submitted At: 2:15pm 04-25-23
This is a huge safety issue for our neighborhood!
I STRONGL Y OPPOSE building a homeless facility at Benton!! Agenda Item: eComments for The next regular scheduled meeting is on Tuesday, May 9, 2023 in the City Hall Council Chambers.

Overall Sentiment
Ying Xu
Location:

Submitted At: 2:15pm 04-25-23
This is a huge safety issue for our neighborhood!
I STRONGL Y OPPOSE building a homeless facility at Benton!! Agenda Item: eComments for MEETING DISCLOSURES
Overall Sentiment
Brian West
Location:

Submitted At: 2:57pm 04-25-23
Mayor Gilmore, City Councilmembers: We OPPOSE the low-barrier interim housing proposed at Benton St. & Lawrence Expressway.

Is LifeMoves transferring homeless families from old shelter to new shelter just to satisfy the opening of a new shelter? After all, they can pretty much do any changes they want once the shelter was built. Who regulate the homeless shelter? Who has the authority to shut down the shelter if laws were not followed? Example: MTV site failed to evict sexual assault client
Ying Xu
Location:

Submitted At: 2:15pm 04-25-23
This is a huge safety issue for our neighborhood!
I STRONGL Y OPPOSE building a homeless facility at Benton!! Bess Henderson
Location:

Submitted At: 4:52pm 04-24-23
We OPPOSE the low-barrier interim housing proposed at Benton St. & Lawrence Expressway.

This is the WRONG location, with such close proximity to 20 schools near by.

Agenda Item: eComments for The time limit within which to commence any lawsuit or legal challenge to any quasi-adjudicative decision made by the City is governed by Section 1094.6 of the Code of Civil Procedure, unless a shorter limitation period is specified by any other provision. Under Section 1094.6, any lawsuit or legal challenge to any quasi-adjudicative decision made by the City must be filed no later than the 90th day following the date on which such decision becomes final. Any lawsuit or legal challenge, which is not filed within that 90-day period, will be barred. If a person wishes to challenge the nature of the above section in court, they may be limited to raising only those issues they or someone else raised at the meeting described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Santa Clara, at or prior to the meeting. In addition, judicial challenge may be limited or barred where the interested party has not sought and exhausted all available administrative remedies.

AB23 ANNOUNCEMENT: Members of the Santa Clara Stadium Authority, Sports and Open Space Authority and Housing Authority are entitled to receive $30 for each attended meeting.

Note: The City Council and its associated Authorities meet as separate agencies but in a concurrent manner. Actions taken should be considered actions of only the identified policy body.

LEGEND: City Council (CC); Stadium Authority (SA); Sports and Open Space Authority (SOSA); Housing Authority (HA); Successor Agency to the City of Santa Clara Redevelopment Agency (SARDA); Bayshore North Project Enhancement Authority (BNPEA); Public Facilities Financing Corporation (PFFC) Public contact was made by posting the Council agenda on the City's official-notice bulletin board outside City Hall Council Chambers. A complete agenda packet is available on the City's website and in the City Clerk's Office at least 72 hours prior to a Regular Meeting and 24 hours prior to a Special Meeting. A hard copy of any agenda report may be requested by contacting the City Clerk's Office at (408) 615-2220, email [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> or at the public information desk at any City of Santa Clara public library.

If a member of the public submits a speaker card for any agenda items, their name will appear in the Minutes. If no speaker card is submitted, the Minutes will reflect "Public Speaker." In accordance with the requirements of Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 ("ADA"), the City of Santa Clara will not discriminate against qualified individuals with disabilities on the basis of disability in its services, programs, or activities, and will ensure that all existing facilities will be made accessible to the maximum extent feasible. The City of Santa Clara will generally, upon request, provide appropriate aids and services leading to effective communication for qualified persons with disabilities including those with speech, hearing, or vision impairments so they can participate equally in the City's programs, services, and activities. The City of Santa Clara will make all reasonable modifications to policies and programs to ensure that people with disabilities have an equal opportunity to enjoy all of its programs, services, and activities.

Individuals who require an auxiliary aid or service for effective communication, or any other disability-related modification of policies or procedures, or other accommodation, in order to participate in a program, service, or activity of the City of Santa Clara, should contact the City's ADA Coordinator at 408-615-3000 as soon as possible but no later than 48 hours before the scheduled event.

Overall Sentiment

Bharath Pandravada
Location:

Submitted At: 4:29pm 04-25-23
We live very close to the proposed site and I strongly oppose the Benton shelter project in Santa Clara. There are definitely better alternatives to help the homeless than building a shelter in this location. With so many schools around, it could have negative effects on safety for children and neighborhood as a whole.

Please take our concerns into account and reconsider this proposal.

Ying Xu
Location:

Submitted At: 2:16pm 04-25-23
This is a huge safety issue for our neighborhood!
I STRONGL Y OPPOSE building a homeless facility at Benton!! shiqi deng
Location:

Submitted At: 2:07pm 04-25-23
I am a resident of Santa Clara city, and I am strongly against the Benton&Lawrence shelter. This will pose a high risk for our community and especially to the children's safety as the shelter is close to several schools near that area.

Tina Tian
Location:

Submitted At: 1:57pm 04-25-23
I live on Benton, one block from the proposed shelter site. I strongly oppose this proposal as it will make our neighborhoods not safe anymore.

Thomas Posey
Location:

Submitted At: 12:25pm 04-25-23
I strongly oppose
Xiaolan Yang
Location:

Submitted At: 12:20pm 04-25-23
I am a resident of Santa Clara. I STRONGL Y OPPOSE
faina kantor
Location:

Submitted At: 8:54am 04-25-23
I am writing to express my strong opposition about the Benton proposal for a low barrier homeless shelter. The homeless shelter will bring to our neighborhood drugs and related crimes, vandalism.

It is deeply disappointing that the city council has chosen to ignore and misunderstand our community's concerns.

Sandrine Basin
Location:

Submitted At: 9:57pm 04-24-23
Hello, I'm living in Santa Clara with my family. I oppose the Benton Low Barrier shelter. We need more mental health facilities and treatment to support the homeless, not more housing.

Haiying Wu
Location:

Submitted At: 9:12pm 04-24-23
I strongly oppose this Benton Low Barrier shelter. LifeMoves and the city only care about the money. They don’t care about our community. They put us in danger.

Megan Katz
Location:

Submitted At: 8:29pm 04-24-23
The new proposal is horrible. It keeps no-screening procedures but plans to put innocent kids next to sex offenders and people with drug addiction, just in order to get a high score for funding. LufeMoves put kids in danger on purpose and ruin their entire life! Shame on LifeMoves! Sarah Foad
Location:

Submitted At: 7:51pm 04-24-23
I'm in strong support of building interim housing at this site.

Greg Dacosta
Location:

Submitted At: 5:08pm 04-24-23
Strongly oppose this project
Puxiao Han
Location:

Submitted At: 12:00am 04-24-23
I strongly oppose this proposal as it will make our neighborhoods not safe anymore.

Sheng Liu
Location:

Submitted At: 10:27am 04-23-23
Hi, I am Sheng Liu, living in Santa Clara with my family. I oppose building a homeless facility at Benton.

City Council and Authorities ConcurrentApril 25, 2023

City Council and Authorities Concurrent
April 25, 2023