Santa Cruz City Council
April 12, 2022

In some communities, this function is achieved with a storage facility (such as a warehouse or shipping container) manned with personnel to bag, check and keep possessions safe for the day. The Winter Shelter Program operated in this manner. Upon signing up for shelter at the intake site, program clients would check their large possessions into a storage container, which would be locked each night. In the morning, clients were returned to the intake site and reunited with their possessions. Other models include unmanned banks of lockers with keys that allow access any time day or night.

Another model is the SHWASHLOCK Program, offered by Ocean Park Community Center (OPCC) in Santa Monica that provides showers, lockers and washers (SHowersWASHersLOCKers) to enable homeless individuals to keep possessions safe and maintain personal hygiene.

Any model pursued should integrate with the Coordinated Entry system, in addition to providing case management, or at a minimum, outreach or referral.

ACTION: Consider various models of this service. Identify and secure facilities to allow individuals to check their possessions into a managed storage facility, or rental storage lockers. This service should be co-located with other homeless services including case management or referral resources, or follow the storage, shower and laundry facility SHWASHLOCK model.

5. Modifying the camping ordinance
This policy area emerged in the fall of 2018. A federal circuit court ruling in September 2018, known as Martin v. Boise, requires local governments to cease enforcement of camping ordinances against homeless individuals with no access to alternative shelter. ” The panel held that, as long as there is no option of sleeping indoors, the government cannot criminalize indigent, homeless people for sleeping outdoors, on public property, on the false premise they had a choice in the matter. “ However, the panel’s “holding does not cover individuals who do 5 | Page

31.263 1.182
have access to adequate temporary shelter, whether because they have the means to pay for it or because it is realistically available to them for free, but who choose not to use it. Nor [does the court] suggest that a jurisdiction with insufficient shelter can never criminalize the act of sleeping outside. Even where shelter is unavailable, an ordinance prohibiting sitting, lying, or sleeping outside at particular times or in particular locations might well be constitutionally permissible. … So, too, might an ordinance barring the obstruction of public rights of way or the erection of certain structures. “
The complex requirements of Martin v. Boise make it challenging for municipalities to both comply with the law and to effectively manage health and safety risks resulting from unsanctioned camping on public property. The City of Santa Cruz has suspended enforcement of the camping ordinance, and has developed a standard operating procedure for abating encampments that are deemed to be threats to public health and safety, however it is expected that the City will continue to be required to take extraordinary measures in order to respond to emerging health and safety threats failing the development of a comprehensive policy to replace the tool of the camping ordinance. In order to resume enforcement of a camping ordinance while remaining compliant with Martin v. Boise, the City would be required to either establish policies regarding the time, place, and manner where sleeping outside on public property would be permitted, or to ensure that adequate temporary shelter space would be made available to anyone who had no other alternatives to sleeping outside.

The CACH may consider providing recommendations for ordinance language establishing the time, place, and manner where sleeping in public is permitted (aka safe sleep zones), or codifying shelter availability conditions under which a revised camping ordinance could be enforced.

FEASIBILITY DISCUSSION:

For Phase 1 of the CACH work plan, the Subcommittee was looking to identify policies which addressed urgent public health and safety priorities, and could be developed into a specific, actionable, policy recommendation by January 2020, or would require more time for development than would be available in either Phase 1 or Phase 2 alone. Due to the complexity of evaluating feasibility, this discussion is limited to the understanding of the Subcommittee members. The expectation is that staff will provide additional feasibility analysis in the near future with respect to fiscal, resource, staffing and partnership requirements.

Restroom and shower policies address an urgent public health need. A range of policy recommendations with a range of costs, public engagement, and political feasibility can be considered. Specific actionable policy recommendations are believed to be achievable for this policy category by January 2020 if not sooner.

Identifying a new site for the River Street Camp and considering effective program modeling for emergency shelter address urgent public health and safety needs. While not without its faults, the existing River Street Camp is a proven concept that can be improved upon. Identifying a site for a replacement program may face significant political challenges, however program modeling improvements and community engagement are expected to mitigate the political challenges.

There are one-time grant funds which remain available for the continued operation of a temporary emergency shelter, however long-term funding sources need to be identified. Specific actionable policy recommendations are believed to be achievable for this policy category by January 2020.
6 | Page

31.264 1.183
Identifying a site for a new outdoor emergency shelter solution such as a transitional encampment or safe sleep site is related to, if not the same policy category as identifying a new site for the existing River Street Camp. While the River Street Camp policies refer to replacement of a specific existing program, this policy category could be generalized to include programs which have not yet been designed or implemented. With respect to replacing River Street Camp, specific actionable policy recommendations are believed to be achievable by January 2020. Program modeling for alternative emergency shelter programs such as transitional encampments, safe parking programs, or safe sleep sites may be achievable by January 2020 depending on the scope of the work. Funding sources for new programs may not be identified until Phase 2, and siting for new programs may depend on establishing funding sources and overcoming political challenges via community engagement.

Secure storage facilities do not address an urgent public health and safety need, but do potentially help lower barriers to other services which do address those needs. While program modeling could be achieved by January 2020, identifying new sites which could be integrated with existing services, and identifying funding sources would be significant barriers to achieve by January 2020. There is currently a service provider that operates in this space who the City has worked with in the past, however the viability of a continued partnership is questionable.

Modifying the camping ordinance has the potential to address a critical shortcoming of existing City policy that has resulted in sporadic public health and safety crises. This policy area faces many of the same challenges as, and is related to, the siting and program modeling for outdoor emergency shelters policy area. There are significant political barriers to achieving actionable policy recommendations, but by beginning community engagement work on this issue in Phase 1, it is anticipated that such specific, actionable recommendations could be achievable by the end of Phase 2.

Submitted by:

Candice Elliott, CACH Co-Chair
Taj Leahy, CACH Co-Chair
Rafael Sonnenfeld, CACH Member
Serg Kagno, CACH Member
Stina Roach, CACH Member
ATTACHMENTS: CACH Polling Results
7 | Page

31.265 1.184
ATTACHMENT 7: DYNAMIC FACILITATION PROCESS REVIEW

31.266 1.185
Dynamic Facilitation 9/17/19 CACH
Data Solutions Concerns Problem Statements

1. perception is a big deal 1. Solution needs to address needs of house and
unhoused

1. Rains have started/are
coming

1. How do we determine the
highest priority/actionable
solutions?

2. Housed people talk
about the homeless as
causing the health and
safety issues, while
homeless people are living
with health and safety
issues

2. Establishing values:
dignity, wellbeing
(mental/physical), respect

2. Siting is biggest issue –
how much stakeholder buy in
is “enough” (informed
consent)

2. How do we define
“feasibility?”

3. Need to set realistic
timeframes for achieving
community/stakeholder
buy in

3. Engage broad number of
stakeholders

3. Not all voices will get
heard

3. How do we engage and
create community buy in?

4. National Alliance to End
Homelessness = good
resources

4. understand different levels
of roles and responsibilities

4. other voices/messages will
dominate

4. How do we determine
cost/budget of solutions?

5. S/one for NAEH will
come to SC to inform

5. Understand continuum of
care in city and County

5. How are we going to make
decision in the CACH

5. What is the purpose of the
CACH (policy or
implementation)

6. Criteria things naturally
move farther than others

6. Identify gaps in service 6. Not enough time in
meetings

6. How do we determine
criteria?

7. Focus Strategies can
help

7. Look at evidence based
best practices

7. Scope-Creep 7. What is the role of
subcommittees?

8. 1 thing will help
establish process

8. Create sub-committees to
move the process along

8. Don’t have experience
“pushing policy”

8. What is the role of staff?

9. These are long-term
problems that are getting
short term solutions

9. Break work into “chunks”
(sub committee)

9. Are we taking heat off City
Council?

9. How do we find Evidence
Based Best Practices

10. RSC will be closed for
infrastructure
development

10. Pick one thing (policy) to
recommend and make it
happen, Develop
understanding, lay
foundation for future work,
do one thing really well

10. We need to get more
educated

10. How can we simplify
decision making process
within CACH

11. RSC was funded by
HAP. For SA but site is only
available until mid-march

11. Hybrid of 1-focus path
(above) = divide CACH into 2-
4 subcommittees and move
forward with whoever is
ready can present

11. RSC is going to close 11. How distributed do we
want to be?

12. Needle questions arise
but the issue is multi
faceted

12. Each committee follows
some protocols

12. Locking at 1 thematic
issue is too simplistic

12. Where will people
without homes sleep in Dec.

13. If we don’t do all 5
things

13. Specific in depth 2-way
community discussion to
create by-in, understanding

13. We aren’t getting
anything done

13. How do we incentivize
people to use the shelter
beds/services available

14. 800 Homeless 14. Committees can meet 14. Days when shelters are 14. How do we direct people

31.267 1.186
more often full, where do we tell people
to go?
to safe sleep

15. 450 have shelter 15. Find long-term funding
for long-term problem

15. Process is over
complicated

15. How much community
buy in does the council need

16. 4 sites on the tablebut insufficient
community buy-in

16. Pick one of the thematic
areas to tackle with a few sub
topics

16. Tendency to “perfect
enemy” gets in the way of
actual acting

16. How do we better
understand stakeholder
needs?

17. More can be
accomplished with
subcommittee

17. Get info from CACH
members. Subcommittees
could focus on: what funds
are available, what are
potential sites/best practices
(temp or permanent)

17. Don’t want to waist time
on new safe sleep ordinance
when it already been worked
on

17. How do we establish
committee process

18. We have different
expectation of what a
subcommittee is

18. Partner with people doing
the work

18. Half baked proposal will
blow up in our face

19. Taj has fixed that
superstructure

19. Start the First Thing, then
leverage into next

19. We need criteria for each
subcommittee to abide by

20. We need staff involved
for experience/knowledge

20. Housing, weather
protection

20. We might over think
committee criteria

21. Community doesn’t
necessarily understand
nuances of different styles
of

21. Storage Facility

22. All solutions revolve
around siting

22. Access to bathrooms

23. All solutions revolve
around management

23. We need co-chairs to
make assignments and get
busy

24. All solutions revolve
around funding

24. Determine site locations

25. It’s okay to ask city for
things

25. Navigation center with
services

26. Low hanging fruit is
what can get done in 1
month

26. Police having “a place” to
tell people to go (legal place
to be)

27. Some things don’t
need committees

27. Hygine services/facilities

28. community
engagement and siting are
each committee

28. Focus on “ordinance,
procedural” shift

29. Look at shelter program
modeling

30. Need community buy-in
committee focused on
community engagement,
funding, siting, etc.

31. Push through siting itself
by: superstructure for tents

32. Let’s start volunteering
for committees/issues

33. Focus on informed

31.268 1.187
consent

34. CACH members should
move toward issues they are
drawn to

35. Focus on heath aspect as
high priority, it’s not political,
affects everyone, easier
consensus

36. Finding places for safe
sleeping

37. Design need to include all
needs (housed, unhoused)

38. Educate community
about the “reality” of risks

39. Ask City attorney for draft
of “safe sleeping” ordinance

40. Invite City Attorney to
give presentation to CACH
regarding camping ordinance

41. Change church safe sleep
places from 3 to 5 spaces

42. Add “best practices” to
Fred’s list

43. Get some success under
our belts, pilot

44. Things that don’t require
committee work can be done
now

45. Proposed structure of sub
committees:

Metta:
1) Community engagement
2) Overall Funding Options
Project Specific:
1) Siting
2) Secure Hygiene Resources

46. Each project
subcommittee comes back
with info re: siting, funding,
management (“best
practices”), public
engagement, Fred’s criteria
8:15 DF over, CACH discusses topics to tackle first with framework established above (#46 Solutions) CACH decided to establish the following subcommittees. These subcommittees will research Funding options, Siting options, Public Engagement, Program Management (best practices), Fred’s criteria

31.269 1.188
Each subcommittee will report to the whole body at each CACH meeting.

Rules and Regulations of Subcommittee:
• Committees will used Fred’s rubric as the guide
• Subcommittees will meet even if not all members can meet (just to move things along) • Staff will present best practices for subcommittee work Public Health (hygiene, needles,
laundry, storage)
Secure Hygiene Resources
ID Sites or Criteria for RSC,
emergency shelter, & safe sleeping
(and modify camping ordinance)
Metta:

Community Engagement
Aran Frank Ami
Serg Stina (2nd choice) Candice
Stina Don Ingrid
Dwain Rafa Taj
Rafa (2nd choice) Serg (2nd choice) Brooke
Katie Brooke (2nd choice) Rafa (3rd Choice)
Motion: Rafa, 2nded, approved by consensus

31.270 1.189
ATTACHMENT 8: FISCAL REPORT ON CITY HOMELESSNESS-RELATED EXPENSES

31.271 1.190

COMMUNITY ADVISORY

COMMITTEE ON HOMELESSNESS
(CACH)

AGENDA REPORT
Oct. 1, 2019
DEPARTMENT: City Manager’s Office
SUBJECT: Fiscal Report on Homelessness Expenses and Revenue Sources RECOMMENDATION: The CACH receive a staff presentation on the City’s fiscal landscape, both expenditures and revenues, related to homelessness.

BACKGROUND: As the CACH moves forward with recommendations to the City Council, it is important to understand the City’s fiscal landscape in regards to homelessness. Included herein is an overview of the current (and projected) expenses as well as potential revenue sources.

EXPENSES: The homelessness-related expenses incurred by the City of Santa Cruz can be categorized into the following areas: departmental operating expenses, direct services, and community program support. Departmental expenses encompass the range of efforts put forth by Public Works, Parks and Recreation, Santa Cruz Police Department and the City Manager’s Office to manage homelessness issues within the City, such as campsite clean-up, vandalism repair, education and outreach. The City currently offers direct services such as financial support for the winter shelter program and oversite of the River Street Camp. And finally, the City helps fund many community based program that support those currently experiencing homelessness.

Below is a table that outlines these average annual expenses:

Department or Program Description of Services Average Annual Expenditure
City Department Operational Expenses (not inclusive of all Depts within the City) Public Works: Resource
Recovery
Campsite clean up $300,000*
Public Works: Operations
Division
Infrastructure repair, syringe cleanup$140,000*
Parks and Recreation Open space management $320,000*
Park Rangers Municipal code enforcement and
resource management
$460,000*
SCPD Estimated 60% of PD calls for
service are homeless-related issues
$14.8 million*
CMO Gateway camp safety and hygiene $300,000
*based on 2017 expenses
Total In Kind Expenses $16,320,000
Direct Services
River Street Camp Infrastructure and shuttle services $220,000

31.272 1.191
2 | Page
(does not include operation/staff)
Winter Shelter City’s portion of support $171,448
Community Program Support
Encompass Community
Services
Housing pathways $50,000
Families in Transition of SC
County
Family Housing Stabilization $15,000
Homeless Garden Project Transitional Employment and Job Training
$17,000
Housing Matters (formerly
Homeless Services Center)
180/2020 $115,000
Housing Matters (formerly
Homeless Services Center)
Hygiene Program $30,000
Bob Lee PACT/HOPES
Program
Outreach services $198,000
Countywide 2-1-1 Information and Referral System $6,500 County DOW Program $75,000
County MOST Program $120,000
HAP Consultant Fees City’s portion of fees $14,000
Homeless Management
Information
System/Coordinated Entry
City’s portion of fees $16,500
Homeward Bound Transportation $25,000
Homeless Coordinating
Committee
$150,000
Downtown Streets Team Work-Experience Program $340,000
Community Action Board of
SC County
Rental Assistance Program $30,000
Total Direct Expenses $1,202,000
Average Annual Total Expenses $17,522,000
REVENUE RESOURCES: The City funds most homelessness response and programming through several revenue sources. Most current in kind and direct service expenses are paid through the City’s General and Enterprise Funds. The following additional funding sources are currently available to the City.

Community Development Block Grant (CDBG): The CDBG an annual grant through Housing and Urban Development (HUD), is a program that provides communities with resources to address a wide range of community development needs. The grant averages about $500,000 annually with $300,000 of the funding allocated to community organization through a request for proposal process. The Santa Cruz City Council decides how these funds will be distributed each year.

FY 2019-2020: Roughly $100,000 of the grant is allocated to homelessness-related services.

Future FYs: The decision on how these funds are allocated is up to the Santa Cruz City Council and is therefore a potential source of revenue for additional homelessness-related programing.

31.273 1.192
3 | Page
Homeless Housing, Assistance and Prevention (HHAP): This California state block grant provides local jurisdictions with funds to support the expansion or development for local capacity to address homelessness.

FY 2019-2020: In 2019 this state funding source was called Homeless Emergency Aid Program (HEAP). HEAP funds were allocated to the City totaling $1,564,677 ($1,400,000 for land purchase to locate an emergency/navigation center, $64,677 for River Street Camp infrastructure, and $100,000 for hygiene related expenses incurred by the City at the unsanctioned Gateway encampment).

FY 2020-2021: Of the $650 million HHAP one-time block grant, approximately $6.5 million is expected to be allocated to the Santa Cruz County Continuum of Care. The allocation/distribution of these funds will be determined by the Santa Cruz County Homeless Action Partnership (HAP).

AB 411: This bill, which is currently awaiting passage at the state level, will avail an estimated $16 million in bond proceeds already secured by the City to be allocated to housing and homeless-related issues, specifically affordable housing and homeless facility development projects.

HUD Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA): In 2019 HUD made available approximately $2.3 billion in funding to provide resources to nonprofits, states and local governments to “quickly re-house homeless individuals, families, persons fleeing domestic violence, and youth while minimizing the trauma and dislocation caused by homelessness; to promote access to and effective utilization of mainstream programs by homeless individuals and families; and to optimize self-sufficiency among those experiencing homelessness.” Of the federal funds allocated, $3,300,000 were received by Santa Cruz County. The City of Santa Cruz has not applied for these funds in the past, but would be eligible to do so.

Grants and Alternative Funding Sources: Although the City does not currently seek out additional grant funding, there are existing sources that could be pursued from other governmental programs to the non-profit sector. Additional research is needed to determine what types of funding sources support municipal programs.

Submitted by:

Megan Bunch, Principal Management Analyst

31.274 1.193
ATTACHMENT 9: CACH RECOMMENDATION CARRIED BY CITY COUNCIL

31.275 1.194
CACH Recommendations Carried by City Council Motions
Dec. 10, 2019 City Council Meeting
Motion carried to direct staff to bring back to Council the following CACH recommendations for action:
• The City continue to help fund the 1220 River Street shelter program by supporting the County to write a new contract with the Salvation Army to continue services at a new location.
• The creation of additional managed low-barrier, ADA accessible emergency shelter program(s) to be opened this winter, either in the City limits or with a shuttle service from the City to the shelter if outside City limits., and include ongoing feedback with regular meetings between the management and the community,
• Expand CACH by one individual member, with CACH determining the nomination criteria, with the selection of the member determined by Council,
• To report back with proposed location, conducting necessary outreach on two additional ADA portable toilets with hand washing stations that are in a covered and well-lighted area, will be distributed throughout the downtown, and will be open 24/7. • Direct the CACH to provide their input regarding the camping ordinance on or before the second Council meeting in February. • Direct CACH to review the intended membership list, and work with City staff to review the existing applicant base and potentially also do targeted outreach to fill some of the open seats that were in the original intent for the committee.

Feb. 25, 2020 City Council Meetings
Motion carried to accept the second status report of the CACH with appreciation for the hard work of the group’s members.

Motion carried to direct the City Manager to prepare an administrative budget adjustment, if necessary, in an amount not to exceed $12,500, to support Council-adopted policy including increased access to health and hygiene facilities inclusive of the following CACH mid-term policy recommendations:
• That the City Council implement a pilot, three-month, staffed shower/laundry program with case management (not to exceed $10,000).
• That the City Council fund laundry/towel services through the Association of Faith Communities (AFC) to support the pilot staffed shower/laundry program (not to exceed $2,500).
• That the City Council monitor, and make public, the use rates, effectiveness and impacts of new hygiene services on immediate surroundings to inform long-term facility solutions.
• Provide clarity to City staff, minimize the negative consequences of discarding survival belongings and minimize the community impacts of unattended personal property.

31.276 1.195
Motion carried to direct the City Manager to draft new comprehensive “Personal Property Management” guidelines with analysis of best practices, resource considerations and implementation considerations to return for Council discussion and possible action no later than May 2020.

Motion carried to adopt the following CACH mid-term policy recommendation:
• That the City Council support shelter and safe sleeping models that include organization/staffing to supervise the site and take responsibility for addressing issues that arise but also include substantive management, operational, and governance roles for participants.

Motion carried to direct the City Attorney to return to Council no later than the second meeting in March with a first reading of an ordinance amending Chapter 6.36 - Camping to include:
1) Prohibition of overnight and daytime encampments in sensitive and at-risk areas of the City, with direction that prior to moving and/or citing people sleeping in restricted locations, information should be provided about legal indoor shelter locations such as the Armory, Salvation Army, or a facility within the County.

At-risk areas should include, but are not limited to, those where:
• Encampment is in a public right of way (road) and/or is blocking pedestrian traffic. • Encampment is blocking or impeding City staff (and/or agents of the City) access to City infrastructure. • Encampment is on private property without the owner’s permission. • Encampment is in an area/configuration that constitutes a danger to occupants. • An imminent fire risk has been determined by the Fire Chief and a fire risk operational plan has been initiated by the Fire Department. • Encampment is within the boundaries of the Water Director’s safe drinking water/watershed habitat map.
• Encampment is within the boundaries of the Parks and Recreation Director’s environmentally sensitive habitat map. • Encampment has already been closed due to Urgent Criteria or Scoring of High Priority with Assessment Tool. 2) Prohibition of high density unpermitted encampments within the City, based on number of occupants and/or square footage. 3) Increase to five (5) the number of overnight vehicles permitted in City-authorized safe-parking programs located on faith- based, commercial, and approved governmental lots, in accordance with conditions approved by Council. By City Council resolution, number of overnight safe-parking vehicles in approved governmental lots may exceed five.

Motion carried to direct the CACH to conduct up to three additional meetings to prepare their final report in order to sunset. The focus of the CACH during these final meetings should continue to be focused on policy considerations around safe sleeping siting and program models that can be embedded in the Santa Cruz County Focus Strategies Plan, are regionally focused, and leverage all available county and state funding

31.277 1.196
opportunities on the horizon. A Community Listening Forum should be included.

Motion carried to direct the members of the 2X2 City-County working group to agendize an item related to safe sleeping siting and program models at their next meeting, for a recommendation on the appropriate body to lead the siting, oversight, programmatic analysis, and public outreach.

31.278 1.197
ATTACHMENT 10: SANTA CRUZ COUNTY HEAP AND CESH AWARDS

31.279 1.198
1 Santa Cruz County HEAP and CESH Awards 2019
Santa Cruz County, its Cities, and its community continue to grapple with a very substantial homelessness challenge. They are not alone in confronting rising homelessness. Counties and Cities across California have reported increased homelessness numbers, and homelessness has become more visible in many locations. Statewide, homelessness has increased by 9% since 2010, while nationally it has decreased by 13% during the same period.1 In 2018, the State of California approved unprecedented funding in response to this growing crisis of homelessness in California. Among other funding sources, the State enacted the onetime $500 million Homeless Emergency Aid Program (HEAP) and the ongoing California Emergency Solutions and Housing (CESH) program. Both of these new programs were in the form of block grants awarded on the basis of formula to the local Continuum of Care (CoC). The Watsonville/Santa Cruz City & County CoC’s share of HEAP funds was $9,674,883.45, while its share of the first round of CESH funds was $889,424.

Community Engagement Process
In preparing to make the best possible use of these funds, the County, Cities, and our local CoC Homeless Action Partnership (HAP), carried out a highly comprehensive, countywide, collaborative process in order to identify priorities and estimated budget amounts for HEAP and CESH eligible activities. This was a very extensive process that included representatives of homeless service providers, homeless youth programs, law enforcement, behavioral health, County and City officials, and adults and youth experiencing homelessness, among many other stakeholder groups. Key steps in the community engagement process were:

1. HAP Meeting: Briefings and Conversation on HEAP & CESH – 6/27/18, 8/15/18, 10/12/18, 10/17/18, & 12/19/18

2. Youth Homelessness Demonstration Program (YHDP): Prioritizing for HEAP Youth Set Aside – 7/17/18, 8/14/18, 9/4/18, 9/25/18, 10/16/18, & 11/20/18

3. HAP Priorities Refresh Process – Survey (96 responses) & 9/21/18 Priorities Workshop (60+ attendees)

4. CESH Countywide Stakeholder Input Meeting- 10/9/18 (30 attendees)

5. HEAP Jurisdictional Stakeholder Input Meetings –11/27/17 County (35 attendees), 11/28/18 Watsonville (20 attendees), & 12/3/18 Santa Cruz (39 attendees)

6. Elected Officials Meetings – ongoing briefings by staff of County and City elected officials

7. Final Approval of CESH Recommendations: 10/12/18 HAP Governing Board/Executive Committee

8. Final Approval of HEAP Recommendations: 12/10/18 HAP Governing Board/Executive Committee.

1 2019-20 California State Governor’s Budget.

31.280 1.199
2 9. Final Approval of HEAP/CESH Request for Proposals document: 1/15/19 HAP Governing Board/Executive Committee.

Project Selection Process
Request for Proposals-
On 1/15/19 the HAP Governing Board and Executive Committee approved a project selection process that centered on a Request for Proposals (RFP) designed to surface the best possible proposals to meet the jurisdictional and community priorities identified through community engagement. Key steps in the project selection process included the following:
• Released the RFP on January 18, 2019 and broadly publicized it through a press release, list serve messages, web postings, and meeting presentations. • Provides an Applicant Technical Assistance Session on January 25, 2019. • Composed a diverse set of 25 reviewers representative of the major geographic areas in the county and with expertise across all priorities areas. • Divided the group of RFP responses into five subpanels for project types as follows:

Services, Prevention & Housing, Emergency Sheltering, Youth Set-Aside, and Capital Feasibility Review.
• Assigned the reviewers to subpanels and required that they sign a conflict of interest statement and recuse themselves where appropriate.
• Assigned the reviewers to do an initial review of projects using a rating tool according to RFP criteria.
• Convened the 5 subpanels during the week of March 4, 2019 to discuss the proposals and reach subpanel consensus on project and funding recommendations in their project areas.
• Convened a cross panel composed of subpanel members and HEAP/CESH planning team members on March 13, 2019 to ensure consistency and alignment across the subpanel recommendations, and develop a cohesive set of recommendations for consideration by the HAP Governing Board and Executive Committee.
• Convened the HAP Governing Board and Executive Committee as the decision body on March 15, 2019 in order to review subpanel and cross panel recommendations and to make final project selection and funding decisions.

Letters of Interest and Emergency Allocation-
In January, the HAP Governing Board and Executive Committee found that there was an urgency to address immediate shelter, health, and safety needs of unsheltered homelessness persons, but that it would take until at least April 2019 to complete the RFP award process.

Therefore, the HAP Governing Board and Executive Committee reached consensus on an emergency allocation of HEAP funds totaling $1,005,000 for emergency shelter and public health and safety hygiene services through June 30, 2019, and $100,000 for a community

31.281 1.200
3 engagement process. The purpose of the emergency allocation for sheltering and hygiene was to protect life, health and safety and to immediately alleviate human suffering that should not be prolonged until the conclusion of the HEAP and CESH RFP process. Thus, the following key steps were taken:
• Released an expedited Request for Letters of Interest (LOI) in early February 2019 totaling $605,000 for emergency sheltering options for unsheltered homeless individuals.
• Convened a subpanel composed of HEAP/CESH planning team members and knowledgeable stakeholders February 13, 2019 to review the LOIs and develop initial project and funding recommendations.
• Convened the HAP Governing Board and Executive Committee as the decision body on February 22, 2019 in order to review LOIs and subpanel recommendations and to make final project selection and funding decisions.
• Released an LOI on March 6, 2019 totaling $100,000 for community engagement and public communications services (the deadline for applications is March 22, 2019). • Allocated the remainder of the emergency allocation to immediate public health and safety hygiene and urgent sheltering needs.

Award Decisions
As a result of the robust community engagement and project selection process, we are very pleased to announce the following award decisions:

HEAP & CESH RFP Award Decisions
Applicant/Project Activities Funded HEAP
Amount
CESH
Amount
Total
City of Santa Cruz
Land Purchase
Land Purchase for:

Emergency Shelter, Hygiene,
Day Services
$1,400,000 $0 $1,400,000
*Reservation of
Funds for North
County Navigation
Center/Year Round
Shelter Operations
Navigation Center
Year-Round Emergency
Shelter
Day Services
Hygiene Services
$1,030,294 $177,888 $1,208,182
Salvation Army
South County
Navigation Center
Shelter Case management
Housing navigation
Hygiene services
Basic needs services
Rental assistance
$822,112 $177,888 $1,000,000
Encompass CS YHDP
Youth Resource
Center
Youth/ young adult day
center services
Respite beds
$787,003 $0 $787,003

31.282 1.201
4 Case management
Abode Services
Rapid Rehousing
Program
Rapid rehousing
Financial assistance
Housing navigation
$382,383 $217,617 $600,000
Homeless Services
Center Paul Lee Loft
Shelter Operations
Shelter
Case management
Hygiene services
$555,000 $0 $555,000
Community Action
Board Watsonville
Works!
Case management
Transitional work experience
$459,182 $0 $459,182
Community Action
Board Rental
Assistance Program
Prevention
Case management
Rental assistance
$381,985 $69,833 $451,818
Community Action
Board YHRT
Youth and young adult:

Case management
Housing navigation
Employment & education
referrals
Benefits referrals
Emergency vouchers
$422,835 $0 $422,835
Association of Faith
Communities Faith
Community Shelter
Shelter
Case management
Hygiene services
$402,692 $0 $402,692
Monarch Services
DV Emergency
Shelter Capital
Improvements
Capital improvements
Domestic violence shelter
Motel vouchers
$350,000 $0 $350,000
Santa Cruz County
Housing Authority
Landlord Incentives
& Move In Costs
Financial assistance
Landlord bonuses
Unit repair fund
$251,700 $68,315 $320,015
Community Bridges
Mountain
Community
Resources
Case management
Hygiene services
Basic needs services
$240,478 $0 $240,478
Association of Faith
Communities
SafeSpaces Parking
Parking
Hygiene services
Volunteer meals
$237,950 $0 $237,950
Cabrillo College
Emergency Housing
Services
Program
Rental assistance $137,724 $0 $137,724
MHCAN Shower Showers $110,994 $0 $110,994

31.283 1.202
5 Room
Congregational
Church, Soquel
MCHC Shower the
People
Portable showers
Hygiene services
$61,270 $0 $61,270
Bill Wilson Center
Shared Housing for
Youth
Youth/young adults:

Shared housing
Case management
Financial assistance
Host incentives
$58,300 $0 $58,300
Santa Cruz County
CoC Lead Planning
CoC planning/coordination $0 $44,471 $44,471
Community
Technology Alliance
Santa Cruz County
HMIS
HMIS services $0 $44,471 $44,471
Santa Cruz County
HSD Smart Path to
Housing and Health
Coordinated entry services $0 $44,471 $44,471
Wings Homeless
Advocacy Vital
Identification
Records
Birth certificates and other ID
services
$38,700 $0 $38,700
* The HAP Governing Board and Executive Committee decided to set aside funds for a North County Navigation Center, but would like further information and coordination before selecting a particular project. Thus, North County Navigation Center applicants will be invited to resubmit a proposal pursuant to specific guidance from the HAP and jurisdictional partners.

HEAP LOI and Emergency Allocation Award Decisions
Applicant/Project Activities Funded HEAP
Amount
CESH
Amount
Total
Emergency Sheltering LOI
Association of Faith
Communities
SafeSpaces Parking
Parking
Hygiene services
Volunteer meals etc.
$45,000 $0 $45,000
Homeless Services
Center Paul Lee Loft
and Hygiene Bay
Shelter
Case management
Hygiene services
$120,000 $0 $120,000
Salvation Army
Santa Cruz
Emergency Shelter
Shelter
Case management
Hygiene services
Basic needs services
$195,000 $0 $195,000
Salvation Army Shelter $110,000 $0 $110,000

31.284 1.203
6 Watsonville
Emergency Shelter
Case management
Hygiene services
Basic needs services
Emergency Allocations - immediate public health & safety hygiene and urgent sheltering needs City of Santa Cruz - River Street $64,677 $0 $64,677
City of Santa Cruz Hygiene at Gateway Plaza $100,000 $0 $100,000 Homeless Services Center Hygiene Bay $18,000 $0 $18,000 Salvation Army - River Street Camp $206,323 $0 $206,323 Please note that the HAP has released, but has not yet reached decisions on the $100,000 LOI for immediate community engagement and public communications services. Finally, per State HEAP and CESH regulations 5% of the total HEAP and CESH allocations have been retained for central local planning and administration of the HEAP and CESH programs.

Summary of RFP Applications and Awards
RFP Applicant Profile-
The response to the RFP was very robust with 35 proposals from 25 agencies requesting approximately $30 million in total. Here are some highlights:
• The amounts requested varied widely; the smallest request was for $12,000 and the largest $6,135,343.
• Most agencies submitted one or two proposals, but three agencies submitted three proposals each.
• Regarding HEAP only, approximately $13.2 million was requested for Services, $3.2 million for Rental Assistance, $9.8 million for Capital Improvements, and $4.85 million for the Youth Set-Aside.
• Regarding categories of proposals, 15 were for emergency interventions, eight were for housing-focused projects, nine were for non-emergency supportive services, and three were for systems investment projects (e.g., HMIS or CES). • Altogether, the projects proposed serving almost 10,000 people and permanently housing more than 1,000.
• The projects were well-spread geographically with 13 proposing services countywide, 13 in the City of Santa Cruz, six in the City of Watsonville, one in the San Lorenzo Valley, one in Aptos, and one in Soquel.
• Regarding homeless populations, 14 projects proposed serving both individuals and families, 11 youth and young adults, 10 individuals only, and zero families only.

RFP Award Profile-
In total, 22 RFP projects within 18 agencies were conditional awarded funding. Here are some highlights:

31.285 1.204
7 • 63% of proposals were awarded funds, although many received less than they requested due to insufficient funding to cover all needs. • Almost 75% of applicants had at least one proposal funded. • The amounts awarded varied widely; the smallest award was for $38,700 and the largest $1,400,000.
• Regarding categories of awarded proposals, 10 were for emergency interventions, four were for housing-focused projects, two were for non-emergency supportive services, three were for youth projects, and three were for systems investment projects. • The awarded projects were well-spread geographically with 10 to provide services countywide, five in the City of Santa Cruz, four in the City of Watsonville, one in the San Lorenzo Valley, one in Aptos, one in Soquel, and one in mid-county. • Regarding homeless populations, 11 awarded projects are for individuals and families, seven are for individuals only, and four are for youth and young adults.

Next Steps – Applicant Notification Letters and County Contracts The HEAP/CESH project team will shortly provide notification letters to each applicant. As noted in the RFP, the awards are conditional upon final negotiation of the scope of work and the applicant’s ability and willingness to execute and conform to a County contract. Some of the awards are for less than the amount requested, so the applicant will need to revise the budget, scope of work, and performance outcomes accordingly. In a few cases, the HAP Governing Board and Executive Committee decided to fund particular activities within a proposal, but not other activities. A description of any conditions and the next steps toward completing a County contract will be provided in the letter.

Also, as a reminder awardees must meet the following requirements:
• Contribute client-level and program-level data to the Santa Cruz County HMIS. • Participate in the Santa Cruz Smart Path Coordinated Entry System for the purpose of prioritizing and matching clients to appropriate housing and service programs. • Adhere to the Housing First principles as defined in State program regulations. • Must comply with all requirements of the State HEAP and/or CESH program.

Finally, the HEAP/CESH project team members look forward to continued collaboration with all stakeholders to make the HEAP and CESH programs a success. ❃❃❃
Thank you very much for your efforts and commitment to ending homelessness in Santa Cruz County. Question may be directed to Rayne Marr at [email protected] or HAP Consultant Tony Gardner at [email protected].

31.286 1.205
ATTACHMENT 11: NEWSOM EXECUTIVE ORDERS JAN. 16, 2020

31.287 1.206

31.288 1.207

31.289 1.208

31.290 1.209

31.291 1.210

31.292 1.211

EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT

STATE OF CALIFORNIA
EXECUTIVE ORDER N-06-19
WHEREAS California is experiencing an acute affordable housing crisis that stifles economic growth, contributes to the homelessness epidemic, consumes an ever-growing share of the paychecks of working families, and holds millions of households back from realizing the California Dream; and
WHEREAS nearly 50 percent of California's households cannot afford the cost of housing in their local market; and
WHEREAS for decades, California has failed to build enough homes for its growing population at all income levels, ranking 49th in the country in housing production per capita in 2016; and
WHEREAS restrictive zoning and land-use policies at the local level are a major cause of the shortfall between California's housing needs and the available supply of housing; and
WHEREAS when communities do not build their fair share of housing, the surrounding region must absorb new residents who, as a consequence of a lack of access to affordable housing, suffer from higher rents and longer commutes; and
WHEREAS the high cost of land also significantly limits the development of affordable housing in areas with the greatest demand for new housing; and
WHEREAS state agencies own thousands of parcels of land throughout the state, some of which exceed those agencies' foreseeable needs; and
WHEREAS excess state land is often located in or near urban areas where the need for new housing is acute; and
WHEREAS the lack of affordable housing across California is a matter of vital statewide importance; and
WHEREAS expanding housing opportunities and solving the affordable housing crisis will require a new level of innovation and cooperation between the public and private sectors; and WHEREAS fostering housing innovation will catalyze new
construction industries and spur job growth in the state; and WHEREAS local zoning ordinances do not govern the use of state property, and the State possesses legal authority to enter into low-cost, long-term leasing agreements with housing developers and accelerate housing development on state-owned land as a public use.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, GAVIN NEWSOM, Governor of the State of California, by virtue of the power and authority vested in me by the Constitution and statutes of the State of California, do hereby issue this order to become effective immediately:

31.293 1.212
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
1 . The Department of General Services shall create a digitized inventory of all state-owned parcels that are in excess of state agencies' foreseeable needs by, among other things,
conducting a comprehensive survey of all state-owned land. This inventory shall be completed by no later than April 30, 2019. To meet this deadline, all agencies under my direct executive authority shall support this effort by responding to all inquiries made by the Department of General Services.

2. The Department of General Services, the Department of Housing and Community Development, and the Housing Finance
Agency shall collaborate to develop two new screening tools for _ prioritizing affordable housing development on excess state land. The tools shall be designed to identify and evaluate parcels of excess state land:
a. Where housing development is most likely to be economically feasible, accounting for, among other factors, a parcel's size, shape, grading, adjacencies, potential for consolidation, lack of site constraints, and proximity to job centers, education, high-frequency public transportation networks, utilities, and other services and amenities; and
b. Where underproduction is impacting housing affordability, accounting for, among other factors, availability of
affordable housing in the job and commute sheds, the gap between supply and demand, and the rate of increase in
rent.

Both tools shall be developed by no later than March 29, 2019.

3. The Department of General Services, in consultation with the Department of Housing and Community Development, shall
apply the new screening tools -to the State's inventory of excess state real property. The Department of General Services shall generate a comprehensive map of excess state real estate parcels where development of affordable housing (a) is feasible and (b) will help address regional underproduction. The map shall overlay a graphical representation (i.e., a heat map) of where affordable housing development is most feasible and impactful. By April 30, 2019, the Department shall provide an interim progress report.

4. Where appropriate, state agencies shall consider exchanging excess state land with local governments for other parcels for purposes of affordable housing development and preservation.

Parcels shall be exchanged with the goal of maximizing regional capacity to build and preserve affordable housing units.

5. The Department of General Services, in consultation with the Department of Housing and Community Development, shall
issue Requests for Proposals on individual parcels and accept proposals from developers of affordable housing interested in entering into low-cost, long-term ground leases of parcels on the priority map.

31.294 1.213
a. Requests for Proposals shall address, among other
considerations: the number of housing units to be built and preserved; maximization of land resources and level of
affordability; feasibility of breaking ground within two years of entering the lease and completing units within three years; the individual cost per unit of construction; the use of renewable construction materials, such as cross-laminated timber; and the developer's demonstrated capacity to
complete affordable housing projects.
b. Selection of projects shall catalyze and incubate innovative models for construction {such as modular or prefabrication), financing, and workforce development.
c. Bidding requirements shall include commitments to pay prevailing wages as required under the law.

6. The Department of General Services, in consultation with the Department of Housing and Community Development, shall
begin to implement the above selection process no later than September 30, 2019.

7. The Department of General Services, the Department of Housing and Community Development, and other state agencies and departments shall use all existing legal and financial authority to expedite and prioritize these developments, including by giving them preference in the award of state funding, pursuant to my further direction. Agencies not under my direct executive authority are requested to do the same.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that as soon as hereafter possible, this Order shall be filed with the Office of the Secretary of State and that widespread publicity and notice shall be given to this Order.

This Order is not intended to, and does not, create any rights or benefits, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity, against the State of California, its departments, agencies, or other entities, its officers or employees, or any other person.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF I have hereunto
set my hand and caused the Great
al of the State of California to be
ffixed this 15th day of January 2019.

ATTEST:

ALEX PADILLA
Secretary of State

31.295 1.214
ATTACHMENT 12: SANTA CRUZ COVID-19 HOMELESSNESS TASK FORCE

31.296 1.215
County of Santa Cruz
701 O C E A N S T R E E T , S A N T A C R U Z , C A 95060 - 4073 ( 8 3 1 ) 454 - 200 0 W W W . S A N T A C R U Z C O U N T Y . US C A R L O S J. P A L A C I O S , C O U N T Y A D M I N I S T R A T I V E O F F I C E R SERVING THE COMMUNITY – WORKING FOR THE FUTURE

PRESS RELEASE
Date: April 1, 2020
Contact: Jason Hoppin
831-454-3401
COVID-19 HOMELESSNESS TASK FORCE ESTABLISHED
Priority tasks include protecting health and supplementing services The County of Santa Cruz and partner cities have established a task force to oversee homeless services during the COVID-19 pandemic, focused on minimizing the spread of the disease by isolating sick and vulnerable individuals and supplementing existing services impacted by the outbreak.

Led by the Santa Cruz County Department of Human Services, the task force consists of staff from the County and cities of Santa Cruz and Watsonville, as well as communitybased organizations’ experts brought in to help secure facilities to shelter both sick and well individuals experiencing homelessness, as well as a range of services needed to support the operation of those facilities.
“We now have more than a dozen staff working together to address this very important community need,” said Elissa Benson, Assistant County Administrative Officer for Santa Cruz County. “Care for people experiencing homelessness is a vital element of our overall plan to limit the spread of COVID-19 in the Santa Cruz County community.” “The City of Santa Cruz stands in partnership with the County and regional homeless service agencies to provide for the best possible support for our unsheltered community,” said Susie O’Hara, Assistant to the City Manager for the City of Santa Cruz and task force member. “We have been working double time to meet all of the objectives set forth by the County and offer new sites for programming as those needs are identified.”
“In our collective efforts to slow down the spread of this dangerous disease, it is especially important that we provide services to the most vulnerable in our community,” said Matt Huffaker Watsonville City Manager. “This collaborative effort will ensure that homeless individuals will be connected with safe shelter and services to ensure their health and the health of the community at large.”

31.297 1.216
ATTACHMENT 13: COMMITTEE MEMBER LETTERS TO CITY COUNCIL

31.298 1.217
County of Santa Cruz
701 O C E A N S T R E E T , S A N T A C R U Z , C A 95060 - 4073 ( 8 3 1 ) 454 - 200 0 W W W . S A N T A C R U Z C O U N T Y . US C A R L O S J. P A L A C I O S , C O U N T Y A D M I N I S T R A T I V E O F F I C E R SERVING THE COMMUNITY – WORKING FOR THE FUTURE
The Human Services Departmental Operations Center is tasked with implementing and overseeing all facets of the local pandemic response within the homelessness community. It has already reached a lease agreement on a private hotel/motel facility, and is ready to scale up with additional lease agreements if and when the need arises.

For medical reasons, the County is not pursuing hotel vouchers to house symptomatic patients in publicly available hotel facilities.

Hotel/motel capacity will be prioritized to house COVID-19-positive homeless patients who are recuperating, homeless individuals with significant COVID-19 exposure in need of quarantine, and medically vulnerable and elderly homeless individuals. These facilities are one pillar of the task force’s four-pillar plan, which also includes expanded sheltering capacity, expanded hygiene infrastructure and direct outreach to homeless individuals.

The task force has requested 5,600 MREs (meals ready-to-eat) from the State for distribution to people experiencing homelessness. In addition, the City of Santa Cruz has completed steps to provide resources to people experiencing homelessness, including hiring a Homelessness Manager and coordinating temporary food distribution with Santa Cruz City Schools to provide 75 meals daily to local persons experiencing homelessness.

The County and partner cities, including Santa Cruz and Watsonville, are nearing completion of a plan to expand overall sheltering capacity to replace capacity diminished by the Santa Cruz County Health Officer’s Shelter in Place order, which limits the number of beds available in existing shelters due to distancing requirements. An announcement on the locations and operations of those sites is expected within days.

The City of Santa Cruz has also worked with the Salvation Army and hired Downtown Streets Team members to bring on additional site monitors to facilitate ongoing safe and client-focused operations at the Armory. Resources at the Housing Matters campus on Coral Street are being reconfigured to accommodate more shelter capacity and resource centers for increased health assessments, and County outreach workers, including Homeless Persons Health Project Staff, have received training on symptoms and care of individuals with COVID-19.

In partnership with Santa Cruz City Schools (SCCS) and facilitated by the County, Santa Cruz City staff will begin distributing bagged meals to persons experiencing homelessness this week. Meals will be distributed across local homeless services and into encampments to ensure those who typically receive food in congregate settings are meeting social distancing protocols.

31.299 1.218
ATTACHMENT 13: COMMITTEE MEMBER LETTERS TO CITY COUNCIL

31.300 1.219
Rafa Sonnenfeld
CACH Member
Safe Sleeping Subcommittee Member
July 29, 2020
Final CACH Report Addendum
I am writing this letter for the purpose of highlighting some of the work and recommendations that I and the CACH Safe Sleep Subcommittee worked on that we unfortunately were not afforded an opportunity to present to the full body of the CACH for inclusion in the final report. When the pandemic required the full attention of city staff, that also meant the work that was being done by the CACH was cut short as well. The Safe Sleep Subcommittee was in the midst of working with staff to develop a “menu” of options for the City Council to consider for various safe sleep programs the city could implement. In addition, this letter will highlight some important recommendations that were already made by the full CACH, and presented to the City Council but to date have not been addressed outside of the context of the COVID-19 response or with a meaningful long-term commitment.

Over the course of a number of public meetings, listening intently to public comments, and receiving correspondence from the public about various potential types of programs for people experiencing homelessness to be afforded a legal place to sleep, it was clear that amongst the housed community, there is a preference for options that are for 24 hours indoor shelters, and tiny home villages.

Many people experiencing homelessness stated a preference for the autonomy of being allowed to camp outdoors independently or in a self-managed camp. In practice, it does not seem likely that the City of Santa Cruz will ever have adequate capacity in its shelter system to meet the needs of 100% of the people who sleep outside, and for this reason, I believe we need to continue to develop city policies such as a revised camping ordinance that does not generally criminalize the act of sleeping outside, and that designates places where people are allowed to camp, even though our community prefers indoor shelter.

We must continue efforts to create additional capacity for managed indoor shelters such as navigation centers, tiny home villages, and temporary indoor shelters while continuing to refine our policing practices: moving to an outreach-first model of enforcement where social workers are the primary contact with the people sleeping outside, and designating lawful areas for people to sleep will result in better outcomes, is more cost effective, and will allow police officers to spend more time dealing with more serious threats to public health and safety instead of essentially continually herding people experiencing homelessness who sleep outside from one area of the city to another.

So in addition to creating a number of lawful outdoor safe-sleeping zones spread throughout the city and moving to an outreach-first model of enforcement for infractions such as trespassing on public FINAL CACH REPORT ADDENDUM 1

31.301 1.220
property, the Safe Sleeping Committee was poised to present a menu of options for more substantial shelter programs to be adopted by the CACH and presented to Council: a navigation center either in a permanent building or sprung structure; tiny home village(s); a program for subsidizing tiny home/ADU construction on private residential property such as what has been implemented in Portland, OR and Los Angeles; new shelter programs in publicly-owned (or leased) buildings such as the Civic Auditorium, or shelter programs for families with school-age children in school gymnasiums; a developer incentive program for temporarily utilizing vacant buildings set to be demolished as shelters such as the former Gateway School (similar to a program proposed in Portland, OR); and presenting a continuum of management costs for outdoor managed sleeping areas from overnight or daytime only programs with minimal oversight and services to fully staffed, 24 hour managed programs.

The CACH never did make specific recommendations about sites for outdoor safe-sleep programs; this was probably the most controversial topic we were asked to look at, and the most challenging.

However, the Safe Sleeping Subcommittee was in the midst of developing a rubric for siting criteria that the city could use in selecting a site that we felt was an improvement over the criteria developed when the city was poised to choose between sites at the Wharf Corporation Yard, the north Depot Park parking lot, a city-owned space on High Street, Lot 17 behind Wheel Works, Jessie Street Marsh or San Lorenzo Park.

That work was ultimately not completed, but we felt adapting the city’s existing scoring systems used by the planning department to weigh the site criteria which we listed in our interim recommendations report would be crucial in producing a fair, balanced siting recommendation that followed objective criteria and reduced neighborhood political influence in the site selection.

Finally, I want to take this opportunity to remind the public about the recommendations and suggestions that have already been made by the CACH, but to date have not been addressed by the City Council. Specifically: Recommendation #1 (the outreach-first model of enforcement); Rec. #2 (developing safe sleeping sites—beyond the temporary nature of the COVID-19 relief funded programs); Rec. #3 (development of additional long term indoor shelter capacity); Recs #6,7, 8 & 25 regarding models of safe sleeping programs and site selection criteria; Recs #4, 5, 16,17,18,19, 20 & 26 regarding modifications to the camping ordinance that reflect the values of the Ninth Circuit Court’s Martin v Boise ruling; and (what I consider the most important steps the city should take) Policy suggestions #23 and 24 recommending a Strategic Action Plan on homelessness with eleven specified elements, and a commitment to making increased shelter capacity and new safe sleeping site programs as well as a new outreach-first model of enforcement the city’s highest homelessness related priorities (note: these were not technically CACH recommendations as the CACH didn’t have enough time in the deliberative process to agree on precise language).

FINAL CACH REPORT ADDENDUM 2

31.302 1.221
June 16, 2020
Dear City Council,
Having served on the CACH, and been specifically involved in the subcommittee for community engagement, I would like to share some thoughts.

I joined the CACH because I believe that one of the most innovative and productive things we can do as a community is gain a greater understanding of one another as community members, including people in the homeless community. For 27 years, I have taught a form of “deep listening” that invites people to listen past their pre- conceived thought systems and beliefs for the kernel of truth another may offer. From this kind of listening, I believe, more agreeable solutions for the entire community may emerge. My past work as director of the National Community Resiliency Project--funded by the Kellogg Foundation--showed incredibly positive outcomes from this approach to community issues, including decreased crime rates.

While the CACH conducted two great community intake sessions (you have the results of these), we were about to embark on a deeper “community listening” program before the Corona virus struck.

While I do not know when we will be able to gather together as a community again, it may be possible to conduct some of these sessions online. I am still willing to offer some pro bono time to do this, and am extending this offer to Police Chief Andy Mills as well— as a way to dialogue with police, activists, residents and people in the homeless community. I envision two parts to such sessions:

Part I would be a session only on how to listen and would include securing agreements from all parties to follow guidelines, and to actually listen at Part II.

Part II would be an amended/abbreviated form of Dynamic Facilitation (DF), the model used in Wisdom Councils, and/or Convergent Facilitation, both of which I have recently trained in. My recent training in DF was, as I saw it, a part of my work for the CACH.

31.303 1.222
Even just launching such a pilot dialogue program would be so helpful, in my mind.

Having attended many Council, and of course, CACH meetings, what I experienced was not a true dialogue, with listening, understanding and generating solutions together (based on all concerns and insights), but rather, two-minute presentations to Council (or CACH) with the threat of a timer buzzing, and incredible restraints on Council/CACH members on responding with their true and heartfelt thinking.

The CACH was more helpful in that--in a somewhat more relaxed atmosphere--people were able to share a bit more fully. But the nature of government committees, including: lack of space to bring up a new issue that might actually be relevant; lack of space to truly converse, debate and reflect; time constraints on setting and circulating an agenda, and the hierarchical nature of this process really clarified in my mind the weaknesses of current processes in terms of bringing all voices to the table in a way that helps everyone feel heard and understood.

I know there is a better way. We, as a CACH, voted for at least one Community Listening program, and also for the City Council to explore Wisdom Councils as an innovative model for moving forward on difficult subjects in the community. Indeed, it was a conversation I had with Chief Andy Mills about the need for such dialogue (even more so now!) that prompted me to apply for the CACH.

I am happy to speak with any of you about any of these ideas. Without committing initially, we might at least dialogue about what form of these ideas might make sense for Santa Cruz today. We face many grave challenges and, indeed, many challenges to come. If we can find a better way to communicate with one another, I believe we could create at least some healthy, positive paths forward.

Yours Truly,
Ami
Ami Chen Mills-Naim
[email protected]
650-424-8984

31.304 1.223
The Work Must Continue
I believe that it is vitally important that any sort of body that is considering legislation or policy that affects people who are homeless needs to have some sort of vehicle for capturing the experiences, concerns and recommendations of those who live outdoors and of the people who deliver services to them.

It is the nature of homelessness in this country right now; that people who are homeless are people who have fallen through the cracks in our other systems. It is impossible for someone who is housed to imagine the realities of the lives of people who live outside without directly listening to their experiences ... Without understanding precisely which cracks people fall through and how they fall through them, to extend the metaphor. I would also argue that it is impossible to write legislation and policy regarding people who are homeless without this understanding as well.

Therefore, I think it is vitally important for the city of Santa Cruz to continue to have some sort of body for capturing this institutional knowledge and wisdom, on an ongoing basis.

Another aspect of the Community Advisory Committee on Homelessness that must also continue is including housed citizens in the process I mention above. This serves two purposes; to get immediate feedback from people who are housed on the recommendations from people who aren't housed and the people who provide services to them, and to provide a venue for the greater community to undertake the cause of assisting those in need among us.

I do not believe that it is unrealistic for our community to find lasting solutions to the issue of homelessness here, that benefit us all. However, for that to happen we must continue the work that was undertaken by the Community Advisory Committee on Homelessness.

Cordially,
7 Evan Morrison
[email protected]
408-761-9930
Current positions:

Program Manager, Paul Lee Loft at Housing Matters
Executive Director, Santa Cruz Free Guide

31.305 1.224
On December 10, 2019 the Community Advisory Committee on Homelessness (CACH) presented immediate recommendations which included shelter, bathrooms, and community engagement. During the Q&A portion of the presentation there was discussion about the ability of committee members to remain engaged in the process. Specific concerns included not feeling heard and feeling alienated. I am writing this letter because I have heard the same sentiments from people on all sides of this issue:
unhoused, housed, mothers who walked their kids to daycare past the Gateway Camp, business owners, land owners, CACH members who I work with on a weekly basis, and others.

The issues we discuss during CACH meetings have high stakes just as the issues debated at Council have high stakes. I can see how difficult it is for members of our community to remain engaged both in the public and private realms. Emotions run high. Sometimes decorum flies out the window. Then if we stand by our commitments, we return again and again to work with people who have opinions that differ from our own. In these conversations most of us are learning how to respectfully disagree with one another while building relationships. The work ahead of us is to continue to build these relationships, to continue to engage, and to disagree without alienating or disregarding each other.

You and I will not always see eye to eye on every issue, but I am committed to returning to you.

Sometimes I may be a little afraid. Sometimes it may take me more time than you or I would like.

However, it is my hope that our relationship grows because of our differences. We must continue to return to each other respectfully if we are to have a thriving democratic system of governance. We are more creative, resilient and effective when people of differing backgrounds come together to find solutions that address the concerns of our city.

Looking forward to working with you,
Candice Elliott
Co-Chair
Community Advisory Committee on Homelessness

31.306 1.225
Consider Ordinance Amending Title 10, Chapter 10.04, 10.40, 10,41,

16.19. and 16.19.070
Oversized
Vehicle
Parking
Santa Cruz City Council Special Meeting 9/21/21
Presented by Santa Cruz Police, Parking and Wastewater and Resource Recovery Departments

31.307 1.226
• Introduction to Oversized Vehicle
Parking (OVS) Ordinance
• Examine scope of the problem, and
past efforts
• Present the proposed Ordinance and
Amendments
• Formulate an Ad Hoc Subcommittee
on Safe Parking Permit Programs
Today’s
Presentation

31.308 1.227
Purpose of Presentation • Define the problems
associated with oversized
vehicle parking
• Introduce to our community the Ordinance language • Provide time to examine and think through the ordinance
• Ensure opportunity to give Council
and staff feedback about the
proposed ordinance
• Build the most fair, consistent and
sound ordinance possible
3 Credit: Lookout SC

31.309 1.228
• Thousands of emails from
community members, 400+ from
west side residents
• Multiple meetings small and large
with community groups by Council
and staff
Community • Decades of input and frustration
Outreach
Arnold’s First Call
• Some Council and community
members actively involved in
drafting, promulgating ordinance.

31.310 1.229
5 Goal of Ordinance is Balance:

Services Options with Enforcement Capability
Ordinance seeks to balance compassion and accountability

31.311 1.230
6 Scope of the Oversized Vehicle Problem
There were 15 – 911 calls so far this year, not including 911 wireless related to oversized vehicles Seven (7)
were for fires, three (3) of oversized vehicles.

Fire responded to 38 vehicle fire incidents in 2020
and 2021. Of those three were oversized vehicles.

Public Works responded to 12 oversized vehicle service
calls and 14 public right of way calls, scores of other clean up and trash pick up calls from police and fire.
(Weekly)

31.312 1.231
Environmental
Concerns
7 Unmanaged parking and
camping can lead to…

31.313 1.232
Criminal
Activities
Lack of Access to
Coastal Parking
8 31.314 1.233
9 The Oversized Vehicle Parking Issue: Some Context

31.315 1.234 Data source: Westside community neighbors Verizon parking analytics program 10 The Oversized Vehicle Parking Issue: Some Context
About 80 vehicles with three or more 72
hour notifications

31.316 1.235
11 The Oversized Vehicle Parking Issue: Some Context
Trouble Index: 911 calls per 1,000 parking events

31.317 1.236
Scope of the Oversized Vehicle Problem
2020 by the Numbers: SCPD
• 2,200+ abatement calls for
service
• 197 oversized vehicles tagged
• 20 oversized vehicles were
towed
2021 by the Numbers: SCPD
• 2,400+ calls for abatement
services
• 294 oversized vehicles were
tagged
• 12 oversized vehicles towed

31.318 1.237
13 The Oversized Vehicle Parking Issue: Some
Context
33% of all Abatement Activity

31.319 1.238
Obstacles and Barriers to Effective Management of Illegal Parking • The cost of precious metals has dropped
• Tow yards have no room for motor homes and buses
• SCPD with the help of Public Works created its own tow yard - proving disruptive to Public Works operations
• The tow lot is overcapacity

31.320 1.239
Cost Per Tow-Unbudgeted Expens e
Cost Type Activity Hours Cost
PO Labor AV Tagging 0.5 $ 22.08
PO Labor Citation Issue & Tow 2 $ 88.32
Tow Company Class C Towing (Heavy Duty) $ 240.00
Tow Company Gate Fee $ 120.00
Tow Company Standard Lein Sale Fee $ 70.00
Tow Company Disposal Fee $ 250.00
PD Labor Police oversight and approval 1 $ 129.00
PW Labor Parking Enforcement Officer 4 $ 126.21
PW Labor Parking Office Supervisor 4 $ 164.31
Total per Vehicle $ 1,209.92

31.321 1.240
Current Resources: AFC
Currently, AFC has 15 operational spaces
in the city and 21 spaces outside of the
City. 13 on religious sites and two on city
property. The police department’s front
lot has been us ed sporadically by AFC.

SCPD Process:
• Inform the immediate neighbors
• Define the duration of the pilot project
• Talk to thos e in the program
• Monitor the progress
• As s es s the appropriateness of
continuation
SCPD had no calls for s ervice, problems or
is s ues with those parking.

Can park on private business property

31.322 1.241
2013
Public Safety
Citizens Tas k
Force
2015
Council approved
and adopted
Ordinance No.
2015-17
August, 2016
Coastal
Commiss ion filed
appeal to
Ordinance
Late 2016
The Tas k Force
recommended strict
parking ordinances
June, 2016
Zoning Administrator
approved Coastal
Development Permit
to implement
ordinance
2021
Appeal still pending,
while other cities have
pass ed s imilar
ordinances
Attempts to Address Oversized Vehicles

31.323 1.242
Ordinance Impacts Health in All Policies
Health – Overs ized vehicle ordinance will help control the flow of untreated urine and feces into the public
s pace, reduce tras h and litter and address some
crime is s ues.

Equity- Ordinance will be challenging for s ome
community members. Council s hould direct staff to
work with Council in an ad hoc committee for s afe
s leeping s ites.

Sustainability- Environmental integrity is a core value in Santa Cruz. The OVO helps to improve environment
conditions, improves access to our costal community
for all res idents and vis itors.

31.324 1.243
• “Loading and Unloading” means actively
moving items to or from an OSV
• “Out of Town Visitor” is a person visiting
as a guest of a city resident
• “Oversized Vehicle” is over 20 ft. long, or
> 7 ft. tall and >7 ft. wide
• “Resident” is a person who maintains a
place of abode or who owns land in
Santa Cruz, or who lives in a vehicle
registered with a Santa Cruz address for
at least six months
Proposed Changes to Current City Ordinances:

Chapter

10.04 “Definitions”

31.325 1.244
• No OSV parking between 12pm – 5am on any highway,
street, alley, or city parking lot, unless authorized
• No electrical, water, gas, telephone, or other utility connections on streets or sidewalks
• No open fires on highways, streets, alleys or parking lots with out a City permit
• OSV owners must maintain surrounding area’s safety,
tidiness, and hygiene
• No OSV parking within 100 ft. of a cross walk, intersection, stop sign or traffic signal
• No parking for unattached trailers unless loading and unloading
• Residents may obtain an OSV permit to park immediately adjacent to their residence
Chapter 10.40
“Stopping,
standing and
parking”
Proposed Changes to Current City Ordinances

31.326 1.245
Chapter 16.19
“Storm Water and
Urban Runoff
Pollution Control”
• No disposal of sewage or grey water to
the storm drain system, including
discharges of Recreational Vehicle
holding tanks.

Proposed Changes to Current City Ordinances

31.327 1.246
• Resident OSV parking permits are valid for one
year
• Permits allow residents to park for four periods of
up to 72 consecutive hours per month
• Out-of-town visitor permits are valid for 72 hours maximum • Residents may receive no more than six out-of-town visitor permits in a year
Overnight Parking Permit Durations

31.328 1.247
Subcommittee appointed by the
Mayor, in cooperation with staff
Develop policy direction on the
expansion of city operated or
sponsored safe parking permit
programs for unhous ed residents
and registered oversized vehicles
in the City of Santa Cruz
Ad Hoc
Subcommittee
To be implemented prior to
enforcement of the overnight
parking components of the
proposed ordinance

31.329 1.248
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Jennifer <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2021 8:13 PM
To: City Council
Cc: Martine Watkins; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Justin Cummings; Sonja Brunner; Donna Meyers; Sandy Brown; Andrew Mills
Subject: Vote NO on oversized vehicle ordinace
Dear Council,
I am so disappointed but not surprised to see the council once again employ criminalization as an attempt to regulate poverty, a method that has long proven to be expensive, ineffective, and harmful to people living in poverty and the community at large. (source: https://www.cohsf.org/Punishing.pdf) Instead of pursuing productive solutions like helping vehicles get registered, providing free, sanitary methods for grey water disposal, and providing more refuse services (all services that would be of benefit to all community members), you have chosen to tow, ticket, and hand out misdemeanors to people who are financially unable to comply with this policy - directly creating more unsheltered homelessness. As with the reactive and unresearched Camping Services and Standards Ordinance- this anti-parking ordinance is not a novel idea where we will have to wait to see if it is effective. We can already see the direct impacts of policy like this both locally, and on a state level. Locally, as a result of SCPD’s recent “Operation Westside Story” at least one person found themselves in new unsheltered homelessness- an elderly, disabled person who had his car towed. He was able to connect with someone who could share his story and attempt to help him, but how many weren’t? (source: https://www.facebook.com/groups/thegreatsharecollective/posts/959417751581772) On a state level, a report from The Western Center on Law and Poverty found that “for people who are low income the consequences of a towed vehicle can be devastating. The cost to retrieve a car after a city-ordered tow is out of reach for many. For many Californians, a vehicle tow means the permanent loss of their car and, along with it, the loss of employment, access to education and medical care, and, for some, their only shelter.

Nonetheless, local governments throughout California regularly tow vehicles for relatively minor offenses:
outstanding parking tickets, lapsed vehicle registration, and remaining parked in one place for more than 72 hours.

Despite constitutional limits on the government’s ability to seize a vehicle in these non-emergency situations, cities routinely tow legally parked cars that pose no threat to public safety.” Also, “cities are losing money on tows, especially when the reason for the tow is someone’s inability to pay government fines and fees. Towed vehicles sold at lien sale in San Diego generally accrue over $3,000 in fees and fines, but the average sale price for these vehicles is about $565. When governments target people of color and low-income people for minor violations, when they fund their programs by charging unreasonable fines and fees for these minor violations, and when they punish people because they can’t afford to pay, it is unconstitutional, unfair, and ultimately, counterproductive.” (source: https://wclp.org/wpcontent/uploads/2019/03/TowedIntoDebt.Report.pdf) Additionally, this ordinance ignores many of the recommendations of the Community Advisory on Homelessness Council (linked in the agenda packet) including this vital piece:
“Of paramount importance, the City must maintain connection with State, County and regional stakeholders, especially the homeless community, on policy considerations and ensure community engagement remains a top priority.”
This ordinance is unresearched, counterproductive, and unacceptable! Do not allow it to become policy! Thank you for doing the right thing,
Jennifer

31.330 1.249
2 Jennifer Eckert Bernau
Pronouns: she/her/hers https://www.mypronouns.org/what-and-why http://www.native-land.ca/
Early Childhood Educator and Garden Classroom Manager at Life Lab "You have to act as if it were possible to radically transform the world. And you have to do it all of the time" ~Angela Davis

31.331 1.250
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Michelle Henderson <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, October 15, 2021 3:03 PM
To: City Council
Cc: Martine Watkins; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Justin Cummings; Sonja Brunner; Donna Meyers; Sandy Brown; Andrew Mills
Subject: Vote NO on oversized vehicle ordinace
Dear Council,
I am outraged but not surprised to see the council once again employ criminalization as an attempt to regulate poverty, a method that has long proven to be expensive, ineffective, and harmful to people living in poverty and the community at large. (source: https://www.cohsf.org/Punishing.pdf) Instead of pursuing productive solutions like helping vehicles get registered, providing free, sanitary methods for grey water disposal, and providing more refuse services (all services that would be of benefit to all community members), you have chosen to tow, ticket, and hand out misdemeanors to people who are financially unable to comply with this policy ‐ directly creating more unsheltered homelessness. As with the reactive and unresearched Camping Services and Standards Ordinance‐ this anti‐parking ordinance is not a novel idea where we will have to wait to see if it is effective. We can already see the direct impacts of policy like this both locally, and on a state level.

Locally, as a result of SCPD’s recent “Operation Westside Story” at least one person found themselves in new unsheltered homelessness‐ an elderly, disabled person who had his car towed. He was able to connect with someone who could share his story and attempt to help him, but how many weren’t? (source:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/thegreatsharecollective/posts/959417751581772) On a state level, a report from The Western Center on Law and Poverty found that “for people who are low income the consequences of a towed vehicle can be devastating. The cost to retrieve a car after a city‐ordered tow is out of reach for many. For many Californians a vehicle tow means the permanent loss of their car and, along with it, the loss of employment, access to education and medical care, and, for some, their only shelter.

Nonetheless, local governments throughout California regularly tow vehicles for relatively minor offenses:
outstanding parking tickets, lapsed vehicle registration, and remaining parked in one place for more than 72 hours. Despite constitutional limits on the government’s ability to seize a vehicle in these non‐emergency situations, cities routinely tow legally parked cars that pose no threat to public safety.” Also, “cities are losing money on tows, especially when the reason for the tow is someone’s inability to pay government fines and fees. Towed vehicles sold at lien sale in San Diego generally accrue over $3,000 in fees and fines, but the average sale price for these vehicles is about $565. When governments target people of color and low‐income people for minor violations, when they fund their programs by charging unreasonable fines and fees for these minor violations, and when they punish people because they can’t afford to pay, it is unconstitutional, unfair, and ultimately, counterproductive.” (source: https://wclp.org/wp‐ content/uploads/2019/03/TowedIntoDebt.Report.pdf) Additionally, this ordinance ignores many of the recommendations of the Community Advisory on Homelessness Council (linked in the agenda packet) including this vital piece: “Of paramount importance, the City must maintain connection with State, County and regional stakeholders, especially the homeless community, on policy considerations and ensure community engagement remains a top priority.”
This ordinance is unresearched, counterproductive, and unacceptable! Do not allow it to become policy! Thank you, a fire victim living in their vehicle, Michelle Henderson

31.332 1.251
2 31.333 1.252
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Kaitlin Faye <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, October 15, 2021 3:50 PM
To: City Council
Cc: Martine Watkins; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Justin Cummings; Sonja Brunner; Donna Meyers; Sandy Brown; Andrew Mills
Subject: Vote NO on oversized vehicle ordinace
Dear Council,
I am outraged but not surprised to see the council once again employ criminalization as an attempt to regulate poverty, a method that has long proven to be expensive, ineffective, and harmful to people living in poverty and the community at large. (source: https://www.cohsf.org/Punishing.pdf) Instead of pursuing productive solutions like helping vehicles get registered, providing free, sanitary methods for grey water disposal, and providing more refuse services (all services that would be of benefit to all community members), you have chosen to tow, ticket, and hand out misdemeanors to people who are financially unable to comply with this policy ‐ directly creating more unsheltered homelessness. As with the reactive and unresearched Camping Services and Standards Ordinance‐ this anti‐parking ordinance is not a novel idea where we will have to wait to see if it is effective. We can already see the direct impacts of policy like this both locally, and on a state level.

Locally, as a result of SCPD’s recent “Operation Westside Story” at least one person found themselves in new unsheltered homelessness‐ an elderly, disabled person who had his car towed. He was able to connect with someone who could share his story and attempt to help him, but how many weren’t? (source:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/thegreatsharecollective/posts/959417751581772) On a state level, a report from The Western Center on Law and Poverty found that “for people who are low income the consequences of a towed vehicle can be devastating. The cost to retrieve a car after a city‐ordered tow is out of reach for many. For many Californians a vehicle tow means the permanent loss of their car and, along with it, the loss of employment, access to education and medical care, and, for some, their only shelter.

Nonetheless, local governments throughout California regularly tow vehicles for relatively minor offenses:
outstanding parking tickets, lapsed vehicle registration, and remaining parked in one place for more than 72 hours. Despite constitutional limits on the government’s ability to seize a vehicle in these non‐emergency situations, cities routinely tow legally parked cars that pose no threat to public safety.” Also, “cities are losing money on tows, especially when the reason for the tow is someone’s inability to pay government fines and fees. Towed vehicles sold at lien sale in San Diego generally accrue over $3,000 in fees and fines, but the average sale price for these vehicles is about $565. When governments target people of color and low‐income people for minor violations, when they fund their programs by charging unreasonable fines and fees for these minor violations, and when they punish people because they can’t afford to pay, it is unconstitutional, unfair, and ultimately, counterproductive.” (source: https://wclp.org/wp‐ content/uploads/2019/03/TowedIntoDebt.Report.pdf)
Additionally, this ordinance ignores many of the recommendations of the Community Advisory on Homelessness Council (linked in the agenda packet) including this vital piece:

31.334 1.253
2 “Of paramount importance, the City must maintain connection with State, County and regional stakeholders, especially the homeless community, on policy considerations and ensure community engagement remains a top priority.”
This ordinance is unresearched, counterproductive, and unacceptable! Do not allow it to become policy! Thank you,
Kaitlin Keller
(27 year resident of Santa Cruz, born and raised 4th generation) Sent from my iPhone

31.335 1.254
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Aethia Danforth <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 17, 2021 10:09 AM
To: City Council
Subject: RV camping
Dear City Council members,
Please stop turning our public streets into RV camping grounds for the houseless.

Please direct the RV's to RV camping grounds or State Parks or Federal Parks or BLM land where they are welcomed.

Please especially start taking care of our local green areas that tax paying residents enjoy . Particularly Antonellis Pond which has taken so much abuse from the houseless individuals in the past 10 years plus because they are continually allowed to use the streets as a private RV park without the facilities. And no, don't give them the facilities, we want Antonellis back!
In the past 9 years that I have walked to Antonellis pond from my westside home, I have witnessed people who are living in their vehicles defecate on the grounds that surround the UCSC building at 2300 Delaware and all around Antonell's pond in the bushes. I have found needles on the paths and a drug den set up beneath the railroad bridge that spans Antonell's Pond. Some live peacefully but so many more do not and there are times that I have not felt safe walking at Antonellis.

The first thing that happens when the houseless pull up in RV's, Campers or cars along Delaware or Natural Bridges Drive or Shaffer Road is to pull out their trash. The trash is left for the city of Santa Cruz to pick up daily if they manage to get to it and if not it is not scattered into the environment. Why are the houseless not driving to the dump to pay for their trash removal? Why aren't the grants for the houseless being used to offset the expense of the houseless invasion of our town?
The RV's that are parked along Antonellis Pond dump their waste water in the storm drain that goes to the Ocean and they have also dumped their sewage water in the pond. Their generators are a noise nuisance. The RV's are rolling environmental health hazards. They belong in a RV camping grounds that actually has the hook ups they need.

Antonellis Pond is a wildlife sanctuary that supports wild birds,deer, coyotes, bobcats, mountain lions, foxes, ect. Protect them, they can't speak for themselves. Give them back their peace and safety. And give the residence a beautiful place to enjoy that isn't blighted by trash,human feces, loud generators, and RV campgrounds on the streets!
Enough is Enough, stop enabling them and give the residence back their green spaces .

Sincerely,
Aethia Danforth

31.336 1.255
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: JOY WEAVER <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2021 2:16 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Over sized and Homeless Car Parking on City Streets Dear City Council,
I own a house (222 Buena Vista Ave, Santa Cruz CA 95062) that I rent out. There is at this time signs stating that no one may park their car from May 15th through Sept 15th between the hours of 5pm and 9am unless they obtain a parking permit from the City of Santa Cruz. This ordinance was passed to allow for residents to park their vehicles when they come home from work such that tourists that generally park here during the day will leave and allow space for the residents who live on this street.

Since most of the houses on this street have no garages or on site parking, allowing anyone to buy a permit and stay here is hardly fair to the residents who live here.

My question is are you going to take this into consideration when you make this ruling? I rent this house out and my tenants have told me that there has been an increase in the amount of people sleeping in their cars in the evening and over night. Making someone park from one to several blocks from their residence is hardly fair. I think that people who do not own or do not rent on this street should not be able to obtain parking permits to park on this street. Furthermore, since there is an increase in homeless parking I would like to see the No Parking signs without permit parking to be extended to year round so as to allow residents access to nearby parking.

If you would respond to this email and answer my questions I would greatly appreciate it.

Thank you,
Joy Weaver
650-279-5204

31.337 1.256
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Dusten Dennis <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 10, 2021 10:07 PM
To: City Council
Subject: No On Street RV Restrictions
Please do not institute a permit system for parking RVs on city streets.

Sincerely,
Dusten Dennis
920 Cayuga St.

31.338 1.257
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Pauline Seales <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, October 07, 2021 5:07 PM
To: City Council
Cc: Martine Watkins; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Justin Cummings; Sonja Brunner; Donna Meyers; Sandy Brown; Andrew Mills
Subject: Vote NO on oversized vehicle ordinace
Dear Council,
I am outraged but not surprised to see the council once again employ criminalization as an attempt to regulate poverty, a method that has long proven to be expensive, ineffective, and harmful to people living in poverty and the community at large. (source: https://www.cohsf.org/Punishing.pdf) Instead of pursuing productive solutions like helping vehicles get registered, providing free, sanitary methods for grey water disposal, and providing more refuse services (all services that would be of benefit to all community members), you have chosen to tow, ticket, and hand out misdemeanors to people who are financially unable to comply with this policy - directly creating more unsheltered homelessness. As with the reactive and unresearched Camping Services and Standards Ordinance- this anti-parking ordinance is not a novel idea where we will have to wait to see if it is effective. We can already see the direct impacts of policy like this both locally, and on a state level.

Locally, as a result of SCPD’s recent “Operation Westside Story” at least one person found themselves in new unsheltered homelessness- an elderly, disabled person who had his car towed. He was able to connect with someone who could share his story and attempt to help him, but how many weren’t? (source:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/thegreatsharecollective/posts/959417751581772) On a state level, a report from The Western Center on Law and Poverty found that “for people who are low income the consequences of a towed vehicle can be devastating. The cost to retrieve a car after a city-ordered tow is out of reach for many. For many Californians a vehicle tow means the permanent loss of their car and, along with it, the loss of employment, access to education and medical care, and, for some, their only shelter.

Nonetheless, local governments throughout California regularly tow vehicles for relatively minor offenses:
outstanding parking tickets, lapsed vehicle registration, and remaining parked in one place for more than 72 hours. Despite constitutional limits on the government’s ability to seize a vehicle in these non-emergency situations, cities routinely tow legally parked cars that pose no threat to public safety.” Also, “cities are losing money on tows, especially when the reason for the tow is someone’s inability to pay government fines and fees. Towed vehicles sold at lien sale in San Diego generally accrue over $3,000 in fees and fines, but the average sale price for these vehicles is about $565. When governments target people of color and low-income people for minor violations, when they fund their programs by charging unreasonable fines and fees for these minor violations, and when they punish people because they can’t afford to pay, it is unconstitutional, unfair, and ultimately, counterproductive.” (source: https://wclp.org/wpcontent/uploads/2019/03/TowedIntoDebt.Report.pdf) Additionally, this ordinance ignores many of the recommendations of the Community Advisory on Homelessness Council (linked in the agenda packet) including this vital piece:
“Of paramount importance, the City must maintain connection with State, County and regional stakeholders,

31.339 1.258
2 especially the homeless community, on policy considerations and ensure community engagement remains a top priority.”
This ordinance is unresearched, counterproductive, and unacceptable! Do not allow it to become policy! Thank you,
<Pauline Seales>

31.340 1.259
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Carole Mulford <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2021 3:10 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Support For RV Ordinance
Dear Mayor Donna Meyers, Vice Mayor Sonja Brunner, Councilmember Sandy Brown, Councilmember Justin Cummings, Councilmember Renee Golder, Councilmember Shebreh Kalantari‐Johnson and Councilmember Martine Watkins:

I am writing to you to implore you to act to remove the health and safety violations on Mission Street Extension.  I am witnessing on a daily basis illegal overnight parking, littering, drug dealing, public intoxication and people using the sidewalks as a toilet.

My perspective:

Over the last decade, I have been a member of a fitness center located on Mission Street Ext. We are a close community of Westside residents that share a passion for health, fitness and well‐being as we live, shop and voted you into office.  Our gym owners took every precaution, followed every required health and safety measure during the pandemic to keep us safe. When we were forced to close, we were given the equipment for free to keep our fitness until the gym was allowed to re‐open. Our owner/coaches took extra measures and spent thousands of dollars on air filters, and extra sanitation. Needless to say, I felt very safe and believed my well‐being was of utmost concern from my coaches. I’m a senior citizen, so even more safety protocols were followed for me.  I am grateful the gym is still operating.  According to Councilwoman Anna Eshoo, 40% of the fitness industry closed permanently due to the pandemic. It’s a daily struggle in this pandemic era for many businesses to keep afloat (especially for those in the business of health and fitness).  Pandemic aside, our gym needs your immediate help.

Luckily, the gym may have survived the pandemic, but today, I am witnessing an alarming concern that impacts my safety going to and from the gym: it’s what’s happening outside on the street. I used to jog on the sidewalk to warm up before class.  Those days are gone because of the illegal overnight RV campers that have encroached on the sidewalk.

They leave mounds of trash, and broken greasy vehicle parts. One day the odor from one such RV was sadly that of a dead person. I witnessed the coroner come twice this summer.

Every day I see the garbage from the night of partying left in the street. Whatever food was eaten, scraps and trash are left knee high in places and I’m sure a gift to the rats and other hungry prey.  I watch people smoke and flick their ashes in the dry brush. I see other vehicles drive over to visit both the RV’s and those camping on the Caltrans side of the fence. They stay for a few minutes, sometimes longer to exchange “something”. They know each other and they know nothing will happen if they stay illegally parked. I have talked with the police officers on many occasions and they say “our hands are tied” meaning we can’t do anything to keep them from illegal parking. Your officers have been very professional and polite yet leave without being able to do anything. One day police officers from Santa Clara came ( I thought to help) but instead they were handing out recruitment flyers. I sure hope we can keep police officers from leaving to work in neighboring cities.

I have been screamed at and cursed at by a woman living on the street. Others have seen her throw rocks, excrement and food.  I only witnessed the yelling but your police reports will tell more. Just today, a client  from the 6am class had her car window smashed and her wallet and phone stolen!

31.341 1.260
2 Now that school is back, I watch the children from Pacific Collegiate School on their lunch break walking to 7/11. They walk in the middle of the street because the sidewalks aren’t passable (trash and human waste). This scares me and should concern you too as you’ve been notified‐ check your own police logs‐ this is not a safe place for students to walk! To the homeless advocates: I too have deep compassion for the unhoused, however leaving them to die in their cars or alone on the streets with zero sanitation is not compassionate at all‐ its killing them and harming the rest of us. The garbage and illegal activities hurt everyone.  I also care about those struggling to survive and see Mission Street a nomads land of illegal, unsafe activity ‐ a haven for those that don’t want the services you offer but prefer a lifestyle that flies in the face of law obeying citizens. Please work with Caltrans and other agencies to remove the debris and criminal behavior (stolen bikes, drug deals, prostitution, theft) and keep the ocean safe from the trash and pollution by not allowing RV campers and the dilapidated campsites.

I could provide hundreds of signatures if you need them but you can also just visit yourself. See with your own eyes and please read your police and coroner’s reports. This is unacceptable behavior, a toxic waste site, and a dangerous place for children to walk. You have mentally not well people left alone that are harming themselves and potentially others.

Please accept the recommendations from the last Staff Report for a RV Ordinance written by councilmembers with community input. As elected officials you have the power to act and help prevent more tragedy.

Respectfully,
Carole Mulford, Santa Cruz County Office of Education, Child Development Department Manager (retired)

31.342 1.261
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Maya Elson <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 02, 2021 5:49 PM
To: City Council
Cc: Martine Watkins; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Justin Cummings; Sonja Brunner; Donna Meyers; Sandy Brown; Andrew Mills
Subject: NO NO NO on the oversized vehicle ordinance
Dear Council,
I am outraged but not surprised to see the council once again employ criminalization as an attempt to regulate poverty, a method that has long proven to be expensive, ineffective, and harmful to people living in poverty and the community at large. (source:
https://www.cohsf.org/Punishing.pdf)
Instead of pursuing productive solutions like helping vehicles get registered, providing free, sanitary methods for grey water disposal, and providing more refuse services (all services that would be of benefit to all community members), you have chosen to tow, ticket, and hand out misdemeanors to people who are financially unable to comply with this policy - directly creating more unsheltered homelessness. As with the reactive and unresearched Camping Services and Standards Ordinance- this anti-parking ordinance is not a novel idea where we will have to wait to see if it is effective. We can already see the direct impacts of policy like this both locally, and on a state level.

Locally, as a result of SCPD’s recent “Operation Westside Story” at least one person found themselves in new unsheltered homelessness- an elderly, disabled person who had his car towed. He was able to connect with someone who could share his story and attempt to help him, but how many weren’t? (source:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/thegreatsharecollective/posts/959417751581772) On a state level, a report from The Western Center on Law and Poverty found that “for people who are low income the consequences of a towed vehicle can be devastating. The cost to retrieve a car after a city-ordered tow is out of reach for many. For many Californians a vehicle tow means the permanent loss of their car and, along with it, the loss of employment, access to education and medical care, and, for some, their only shelter.

Nonetheless, local governments throughout California regularly tow vehicles for relatively minor offenses: outstanding parking tickets, lapsed vehicle registration, and remaining parked in one place for more than 72 hours. Despite constitutional limits on the government’s ability to seize a vehicle in these non-emergency situations, cities routinely tow legally parked cars that pose no threat to public safety.” Also, “cities are losing money on tows, especially when the reason for the tow is someone’s inability to pay government fines and fees.

Towed vehicles sold at lien sale in San Diego generally accrue over $3,000 in fees and fines, but the average sale price for these vehicles is about $565. When governments target people of color and low-income people for minor violations, when they fund their programs by charging unreasonable fines and fees for these minor violations, and when they punish people because they can’t afford to pay, it is unconstitutional, unfair, and ultimately, counterproductive.” (source: https://wclp.org/wpcontent/uploads/2019/03/TowedIntoDebt.Report.pdf) Additionally, this ordinance ignores many of the recommendations of the Community Advisory on Homelessness Council (linked in the agenda packet) including this vital piece:
“Of paramount importance, the City must maintain connection with State, County and regional stakeholders, especially the homeless community, on policy considerations and ensure community engagement remains a top priority.” This ordinance is unresearched, counterproductive, and unacceptable! Do not allow it to become policy! Thank you,
Maya Elson
--
Maya Elson
Executive Director of CoRenewal
Guide with Gaia Passages
Mycological Educator

31.343 1.262
2 Outreach Coordinator with Mazu Mushrooms

31.344 1.263
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bonnie Bush
Sent: Friday, October 01, 2021 10:23 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Fwd: Proposed amendments to oversize vehicle parking, ordinance 2021 Bonnie Bush, CMC
City Clerk
831-420-5035
Begin forwarded message:

From: michael zelver <[email protected]>
Date: September 30, 2021 at 1:41:57 PM PDT
To: Bonnie Bush <[email protected]>
Subject: Proposed amendments to oversize vehicle parking, ordinance 2021

To City Clerk,
Please include this letter in the council packet for consideration with respect to amendments to the following:

ORDINANCE NO. 2021- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ AMENDING TITLE 10 “VEHICLES AND TRAFFIC” AT CHAPTER 10.04 “DEFINITIONS” AND CHAPTER 10.40 “STOPPING, STANDING AND PARKING” AND CHAPTER 10.41 “CITYWIDE PARKING PERMIT” PERTAINING TO THE PARKING OF OVERSIZED VEHICLES. AND CHAPTER 16.19 “STORM WATER AND URBAN RUNOFF POLLUTION CONTROL” AND AMEND SECTION 16.19.070 “DISCHARGE OF SEWAGE PROHIBITED”
Dear Mayor & Council Members,
I fully support the ordinance amendments and efforts to control the problems associated with the oversize vehicle parking in Santa Cruz, however, there is one aspect to the proposed amendments which seems problematic as follows:
(b) Oversized vehicle does not include pickup trucks, vans, or sport utility vehicles,which that are less than twenty-five feet in length and eight feet in height.” Sprinter Vans have become very popular. In some respects, they are replacing pickup trucks as utility vehicles. The vans typically come in two sizes 19 feet and 23 -24 feet. All of the vans are higher then 8 feet. The vans are used for commercial purposes, as utility vehicles by home owners and as camper vans. Many of the vans double as utility vehicles and weekend camper vehicles much like pickup trucks do. Some of the vans are over 20 feet in length, all are over 8 feet in height.

31.345 1.264
2 I can’t see how one would be able to make a judgment call or enforce the ordinance as proposed with respect to the numerous Sprinter Vans (and the numbers are growing due to their popularity). If Sprinter Vans are swept up in the enforcement efforts, I imagine there will be some uncomfortable pushback due to unintended consequences. Sprinter Vans represent a considerable investment. The vans should be able to park on city streets. Constantly applying for permits seems problematic.

From my observation, the problems typically relate to older RV’s and not with Sprinter Vans. In addition, I have observed older vans that are less the 20 feet in length and 8 feet in height camping overnight on the city streets along with pickup trucks with camper shells. I appears these vehicles would be exempt under the proposed ordinance illustrating how tricky it is to craft language around this issue.

Perhaps the language could exempt Sprinter Vans specifically. (b) Oversized vehicle does not include pickup trucks, vans, or sport utility vehicles,which that are less than twenty-five feet in length and eight feet in height.” The exception being Sprinter Vans which are more then eight feet in height or twenty feet in length.

I recognize this is far from a perfect solution, however, it may serve to avoid an unintended issue while still addressing the vast majority of the problems associated the numerous RV’s and campers parking in the neighborhoods.

Sincerely,
Michael Zelver

31.346 1.265
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Suzanne T <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2021 8:52 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Overnight parking
I believe allowing oversized vehicles to park anywhere is making all our neighborhoods unsafe and ruining property values. There needs to be designated areas outside residential Areas for this. Unused govt land or parking lots in UCSC or Cabrillo overnight only or it becomes an eyesore with makeshift fences and accumulate junk, bicycles.

This only encourages more people to
Come here and adopt same lifestyle further devaluing our properties and making it unsafe for all. Our lenient policies do not support the citizens who contribute to making this a desirable place to live.

Suzanne T
Concerned citizen
--
Suzanne Teixeira
Bailey Properties
Circle of Champions
Website: SuzanneTeixeira.com
C: 831-345-2060
Dre: 00923308

31.347 1.266
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: [email protected]
Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2021 5:29 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Oversize vehicles and sedans Delaware area Santa Cruz Hello, I am a resident of Santa Cruz for over 40 years and I care about our community.

I am an avid bike rider and go through the Delaware and Santa Cruz Westside area over 5 times a week.

During the early am and often in to the late evenings. I have seen so much ! Yes we do need to be compassionate but the situation is out of hand. RV waste, camping, trash, drug dealing, etc. Many vehicles staying long periods of time. Please start to enforce some standards it is not a save area. I have seen the 20 RVs that have been towed away in our landfill, there are many others that should not be on the road as well.

I have seen an RV leave the side of the road dragging a bathroom waste house as it pour out in to the street in front of me.

I was involved with others in the community for the Olive St. ( CVS) RV enforcement. That process went very well. The RV issue on Olive St. has improved a great deal and has almost stopped. I appreciated the city traffic efforts. Please continue.

Sincerely, Troy Mayers
Bay Street.

31.348 1.267
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Susie Sha <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2021 5:14 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Homeless ness and RV's
HI CC
How about asking Newsome to open up areas of land and put in bathrooms and showers, Let him open up and work crews where like the parks the seniors get to camp free if they clean bathrooms etc. OR go out and have them plant trees where Newsome let our forest burn and blames it on the state. During the depression our state parks got built with people out of work and were put to work.

Ask Newsome that during winter months to open our local state parks that have camping spots and RV parking that have bathrooms and showers. But they must work and be able to pay for the parks garbage disposal and use of the parks. No freebies. If they are lawlessness and want to to do drugs then they are out. Why should we want these homeless in our neighborhoods only to pick up their trash while we stare out our front window at the side of a giant RV? They need to be documented with an ID. That means they take out a permit to show who they are. Must be local people because if you allow this......more will come from all over.

IF you made available such a place, it should be seniors and families first. They should not have to live next to people who do drugs and are lawlessness.

Each city should of do a growth assessment in terms of housing needed now and in the future. Don't make Santa Cruz become building on top of itself. Let it grow outward. Oh but wait...... wheres the water? have you planned for how much more water is needed for population growth and water usage? It seems that nothing is planned for the future but just for emergencies.

Susie Sha

31.349 1.268
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Dana Immertreu <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2021 5:12 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Oversized vehicle parking
I'm writing in regard to the recent hearings on an oversized vehicle parking ordinance. I strongly support stricter regulation/enforcement regarding these types of vehicles and their parking on city streets. I live at the corner of Grant and Emmeline and there have been several times in the 2 years that I've lived here that someone living in an RV has parked directly in front of my house. On one occasion the person had a noisy compressor that they operated 24 hours a day. Law enforcement has always been ultimately successful in moving these vehicles (either under their own steam or with the help of a tow truck). But it would be really nice if took less than 4 or 5 days for that to happen.

Another problem spot is along May Ave, where it meets up with Water. I used to walk my dog every day along that route to go to Starbucks. But there were always 1 - 5 RVs parked in that area and after quite a few unpleasant run-ins with the residents of the campers, not to mention the smell and the trash in the surroundings, I stopped going to Starbucks and instead chose a different morning route. Just an example of the way this kind of thing restricts the life of people in the neighborhood and impacts business foot traffic.

Thanks,
Dana Immertreu

31.350 1.269
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Hannah Grishaw-Jones <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2021 11:43 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Stop the overnight parking ban
Dear council members,
Today I am writing to urge the council not to pass the RV overnight parking ban for which discussion will resume on Oct. 26. Bans such as this directly target people without stable homes in our community. Instead of targeting those who are already suffering so much as a result of our skyrocketing rent, we must invest in community resources and affordable housing that will help people access stable work and living situations. An ordinance such as this will only increase inequity in our community. Please keep these concerns in mind as you reopen this discussion.

Sincerely,
Hannah
Santa Cruz, CA

31.351 1.270
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Chrissy Wagner <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2021 1:45 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Vote NO on Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Dear Council,
The proposed Oversized Vehicles Ordinance (OVO) is unresearched, counterproductive, and unacceptable.

At the September 21, 2021 council meeting, we learned that the goal of OVO is to give police enhanced tools to %2��move vehicles along%2��. According to the City Attorney, enforcing current environmental and nuisance laws is ineffectual. He said, %2��just writing a citation, even if it%2��s a misdemeanor, even if you could arrest someone and take them into custody, the way the court process works these days, they would be right back out on the street within an hour and go back to a parked RV and continue to engage in the conduct we%2��re trying to address%2��. It seems that instead of acknowledging that ticketing, towing, and writing misdemeanors are not an effective way of managing homelessness (as supported by decades of research), the city will double down and create a new tool to incarcerate people who cannot afford to comply with the OVO, all while not significantly providing resources that would help people to avoid engaging in so-called %2��nuisance behaviors%2��. Many of these %2��nuisance behaviors%2�� are acts of survival by our marginalized neighbors who have been abandoned by the city. The repeated reference to the need to address health and safety concerns, without acknowledging that the health and safety of people sleeping in vehicles for survival is severely impacted by removing their shelter is disgusting and clearly in opposition with Health In All Policies.

The proposed solution, as outlined by Mills, is that OVO will allow the city to cite misdemeanor infractions, take an individual into custody, have the city attorney prosecute the individual, levy fines on a person living in poverty, and then tow their vehicle when they are unable to comply. Additionally, Andy Mills disclosed that towing is incredibly resource intensive and expensive and that the city has had to create a brand new tow-yard in order to accommodate the RVs and vehicles seized during %2��Operation Westside Story%2��. Even more money and resources will be spent fighting lawsuits that challenge the constitutionality of OVO and appealing to the coastal commission, who called the last version of ordinance %2��onerous,%2�� %2��drastic%2�� and %2��draconian%2�� I am outraged that city resources will be used to create more unsheltered homelessness and deepen cycles of poverty. Those very same city resources should be used for productive solutions that use city property for safe sleeping programs, help vehicles get registered, provide free sanitary methods for grey water disposal, and provide more refuse services (all services that would be of benefit to all community members).

The bottom line is people have nowhere else to go. It is not enough to include vague mention of safe sleeping programs while prioritizing criminalization of our most vulnerable neighbors. The Affiliated Faith Community (AFC) has been operating its SafeSpaces Parking Program for years and it is currently the ONLY resource being offered when police force people to move their vehicles under threat of ticketing and misdemeanors. They are required by law to provide a safe place to sleep when they displace someone from their survival shelter; however, as program director, Reverend Joseph Jacobs, shared at the city council meeting a month ago: Despite this reliance on referral to AFC (who operates 41 overnight parking spaces), the city has *never* funded their services and, recently, even refused to financially support expansion. Instead, these programs have been mentioned only as an afterthought, despite being proven to provide stability and bolster the ability to transition to housing, in addition to offering a more dignified survival option to being unsheltered. The city continues to be disingenuous about their support of existing programs and there are simply not enough alternative shelters and housing available.

We need action that prioritizes listening to and coordinating with experts: our houseless community, community advocates and service providers, researchers who study houselessness, and the County Health and Human Service Departments.

We demand services without the threat of criminalization! Do not allow OVO to become policy! Thank you,
Christian Weihrauch

31.352 1.271
2 Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

31.353 1.272
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Nolan B <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2021 2:19 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Vote NO on Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Dear Council,
The proposed Oversized Vehicles Ordinance (OVO) is unresearched, counterproductive, and unacceptable.

At the September 21, 2021 council meeting, we learned that the goal of OVO is to give police enhanced tools to “move vehicles along”. According to the City Attorney, enforcing current environmental and nuisance laws is ineffectual. He said, “just writing a citation, even if it’s a misdemeanor, even if you could arrest someone and take them into custody, the way the court process works these days, they would be right back out on the street within an hour and go back to a parked RV and continue to engage in the conduct we’re trying to address”. It seems that instead of acknowledging that ticketing, towing, and writing misdemeanors are not an effective way of managing homelessness (as supported by decades of research), the city will double down and create a new tool to incarcerate people who cannot afford to comply with the OVO, all while not significantly providing resources that would help people to avoid engaging in so-called “nuisance behaviors”. Many of these “nuisance behaviors” are acts of survival by our marginalized neighbors who have been abandoned by the city. The repeated reference to the need to address health and safety concerns, without acknowledging that the health and safety of people sleeping in vehicles for survival is severely impacted by removing their shelter is disgusting and clearly in opposition with Health In All Policies.

The proposed solution, as outlined by Mills, is that OVO will allow the city to cite misdemeanor infractions, take an individual into custody, have the city attorney prosecute the individual, levy fines on a person living in poverty, and then tow their vehicle when they are unable to comply. Additionally, Andy Mills disclosed that towing is incredibly resource intensive and expensive and that the city has had to create a brand new tow-yard in order to accommodate the RVs and vehicles seized during “Operation Westside Story”. Even more money and resources will be spent fighting lawsuits that challenge the constitutionality of OVO and appealing to the coastal commission, who called the last version of ordinance “onerous,” “drastic” and “draconian” I am outraged that city resources will be used to create more unsheltered homelessness and deepen cycles of poverty.

Those very same city resources should be used for productive solutions that use city property for safe sleeping programs, help vehicles get registered, provide free sanitary methods for grey water disposal, and provide more refuse services (all services that would be of benefit to all community members).

The bottom line is people have nowhere else to go. It is not enough to include vague mention of safe sleeping programs while prioritizing criminalization of our most vulnerable neighbors. The Affiliated Faith Community (AFC) has been operating its SafeSpaces Parking Program for years and it is currently the ONLY resource being offered when police force people to move their vehicles under threat of ticketing and misdemeanors. They are required by law to provide a safe place to sleep when they displace someone from their survival shelter; however, as program director, Reverend Joseph Jacobs, shared at the city council meeting a month ago: Despite this reliance on referral to AFC (who operates 41 overnight parking spaces), the city has *never* funded their services and, recently, even refused to financially support expansion. Instead, these programs have been mentioned only as an afterthought, despite being proven to provide stability and bolster the ability to transition to housing, in addition to offering a more dignified survival option to being unsheltered. The city continues to be disingenuous about their support of existing programs and there are simply not enough alternative shelters

31.354 1.273
2 and housing available.

We need action that prioritizes listening to and coordinating with experts: our houseless community, community advocates and service providers, researchers who study houselessness, and the County Health and Human Service Departments.

We demand services without the threat of criminalization! Do not allow OVO to become policy! Thank you,
Nolan

31.355 1.274
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Katie <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2021 3:40 PM
To: City Council
Cc: Martine Watkins; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Renee Golder; Donna Meyers; Justin Cummings; Sandy Brown; Sonja Brunner; Lee Butler; Andrew Mills; Larry Imwalle Subject: Vote NO on Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Dear Council,
The proposed Oversized Vehicles Ordinance (OVO) is unresearched, counterproductive, and unacceptable.

At the September 21, 2021 council meeting, we learned that the goal of OVO is to give police enhanced tools to “move vehicles along”. According to the City Attorney, enforcing current environmental and nuisance laws is ineffectual. He said, “just writing a citation, even if it’s a misdemeanor, even if you could arrest someone and take them into custody, the way the court process works these days, they would be right back out on the street within an hour and go back to a parked RV and continue to engage in the conduct we’re trying to address”. It seems that instead of acknowledging that ticketing, towing, and writing misdemeanors are not an effective way of managing homelessness (as supported by decades of research), the city will double down and create a new tool to incarcerate people who cannot afford to comply with the OVO, all while not significantly providing resources that would help people to avoid engaging in so‐called “nuisance behaviors”. Many of these “nuisance behaviors” are acts of survival by our marginalized neighbors who have been abandoned by the city. The repeated reference to the need to address health and safety concerns, without acknowledging that the health and safety of people sleeping in vehicles for survival is severely impacted by removing their shelter is disgusting and clearly in opposition with Health In All Policies.

The proposed solution, as outlined by Mills, is that OVO will allow the city to cite misdemeanor infractions, take an individual into custody, have the city attorney prosecute the individual, levy fines on a person living in poverty, and then tow their vehicle when they are unable to comply. Additionally, Andy Mills disclosed that towing is incredibly resource intensive and expensive and that the city has had to create a brand new tow‐yard in order to accommodate the RVs and vehicles seized during “Operation Westside Story”. Even more money and resources will be spent fighting lawsuits that challenge the constitutionality of OVO and appealing to the coastal commission, who called the last version of ordinance “onerous,” “drastic” and “draconian” I am outraged that city resources will be used to create more unsheltered homelessness and deepen cycles of poverty. Those very same city resources should be used for productive solutions that use city property for safe sleeping programs, help vehicles get registered, provide free sanitary methods for grey water disposal, and provide more refuse services (all services that would be of benefit to all community members).

The bottom line is people have nowhere else to go. It is not enough to include vague mention of safe sleeping programs while prioritizing criminalization of our most vulnerable neighbors. The Affiliated Faith Community (AFC) has been operating its SafeSpaces Parking Program for years and it is currently the ONLY resource being offered when police force people to move their vehicles under threat of ticketing and misdemeanors. They are required by law to provide a safe place to sleep when they displace someone from their survival shelter; however, as program director, Reverend Joseph Jacobs, shared at the city council meeting a month ago:

Despite this reliance on referral to AFC (who operates 41 overnight parking spaces), the city has *never* funded their services and, recently, even refused to financially support expansion. Instead, these programs have been mentioned only as an afterthought, despite being proven to provide stability and bolster the ability to transition to housing, in addition to offering a more dignified survival option to being unsheltered. The city

31.356 1.275
2 continues to be disingenuous about their support of existing programs and there are simply not enough alternative shelters and housing available.

We need action that prioritizes listening to and coordinating with experts: our houseless community, community advocates and service providers, researchers who study houselessness, and the County Health and Human Service Departments.

We demand services without the threat of criminalization! Do not allow OVO to become policy! Thank you,
Katie Brooks

31.357 1.276
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: [email protected]
Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2021 3:24 PM
To: City Council
Cc: Martine Watkins; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Renee Golder; Donna Meyers; Justin Cummings; Sandy Brown; Sonja Brunner; Lee Butler; Andrew Mills; Larry Imwalle Subject: Vote NO on Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Dear Council, <BR> <BR>The proposed Oversized Vehicles Ordinance (OVO) is unresearched, counterproductive, and unacceptable. <BR> <BR>At the September 21, 2021 council meeting, we learned that the goal of OVO is to give police enhanced tools to “move vehicles along”. According to the City Attorney, enforcing current environmental and nuisance laws is ineffectual. He said, “just writing a citation, even if it’s a misdemeanor, even if you could arrest someone and take them into custody, the way the court process works these days, they would be right back out on the street within an hour and go back to a parked RV and continue to engage in the conduct we’re trying to address”. It seems that instead of acknowledging that ticketing, towing, and writing misdemeanors are not an effective way of managing homelessness (as supported by decades of research), the city will double down and create a new tool to incarcerate people who cannot afford to comply with the OVO, all while not significantly providing resources that would help people to avoid engaging in so‐called “nuisance behaviors”. Many of these “nuisance behaviors” are acts of survival by our marginalized neighbors who have been abandoned by the city. The repeated reference to the need to address health and safety concerns, without acknowledging that the health and safety of people sleeping in vehicles for survival is severely impacted by removing their shelter is disgusting and clearly in opposition with Health In All Policies. <BR> <BR>The proposed solution, as outlined by Mills, is that OVO will allow the city to cite misdemeanor infractions, take an individual into custody, have the city attorney prosecute the individual, levy fines on a person living in poverty, and then tow their vehicle when they are unable to comply. Additionally, Andy Mills disclosed that towing is incredibly resource intensive and expensive and that the city has had to create a brand new tow‐yard in order to accommodate the RVs and vehicles seized during “Operation Westside Story”. Even more money and resources will be spent fighting lawsuits that challenge the constitutionality of OVO and appealing to the coastal commission, who called the last version of ordinance “onerous,” “drastic” and “draconian” I am outraged that city resources will be used to create more unsheltered homelessness and deepen cycles of poverty. Those very same city resources should be used for productive solutions that use city property for safe sleeping programs, help vehicles get registered, provide free sanitary methods for grey water disposal, and provide more refuse services (all services that would be of benefit to all community members). <BR> <BR> <BR>The bottom line is people have nowhere else to go. It is not enough to include vague mention of safe sleeping programs while prioritizing criminalization of our most vulnerable neighbors. The Affiliated Faith Community (AFC) has been operating its SafeSpaces Parking Program for years and it is currently the ONLY resource being offered when police force people to move their vehicles under threat of ticketing and misdemeanors. They are required by law to provide a safe place to sleep when they displace someone from their survival shelter; however, as program director, Reverend Joseph Jacobs, shared at the city council meeting a month ago: Despite this reliance on referral to AFC (who operates 41 overnight parking spaces), the city has *never* funded their services and, recently, even refused to financially support expansion. Instead, these programs have been mentioned only as an afterthought, despite being proven to provide stability and bolster the ability to transition to housing, in addition to offering a more dignified survival option to being unsheltered. The city continues to be disingenuous about their support of existing programs and there are simply not enough alternative shelters and housing available. <BR> <BR>We need action that prioritizes listening to and coordinating with experts: our houseless community, community

31.358 1.277
2 advocates and service providers, researchers who study houselessness, and the County Health and Human Service Departments. <BR> <BR>We demand services without the threat of criminalization! Do not allow OVO to become policy! <BR> <BR> <BR>Thank you, <BR> <BR><Rosie Gonce<BR> Sent from my iPhone

31.359 1.278
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Reggie Meisler <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2021 4:41 PM
To: City Council; Martine Watkins; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Renee Golder; Justin Cummings; Sandy Brown; Sonja Brunner; Donna Meyers; Lee Butler; Andrew Mills; Larry Imwalle
Subject: Vote NO on OVO
Dear Council,
The proposed Oversized Vehicles Ordinance (OVO) is unresearched, counterproductive, and unacceptable.

At the September 21, 2021 council meeting, we learned that the goal of OVO is to give police enhanced tools to “move vehicles along”.

According to the City Attorney, enforcing current environmental and nuisance laws is ineffectual. He said, “just writing a citation, even if it’s a misdemeanor, even if you could arrest someone and take them into custody, the way the court process works these days, they would be right back out on the street within an hour and go back to a parked RV and continue to engage in the conduct we’re trying to address”. It seems that instead of acknowledging that ticketing, towing, and writing misdemeanors are not an effective way of managing homelessness (as supported by decades of research), the city will double down and create a new tool to incarcerate people who cannot afford to comply with the OVO, all while not significantly providing resources that would help people to avoid engaging in so-called “nuisance behaviors”. Many of these “nuisance behaviors” are acts of survival by our marginalized neighbors who have been abandoned by the city. The repeated reference to the need to address health and safety concerns, without acknowledging that the health and safety of people sleeping in vehicles for survival is severely impacted by removing their shelter is disgusting and clearly in opposition with Health In All Policies.

The proposed solution, as outlined by Mills, is that OVO will allow the city to cite misdemeanor infractions, take an individual into custody, have the city attorney prosecute the individual, levy fines on a person living in poverty, and then tow their vehicle when they are unable to comply. Additionally, Andy Mills disclosed that towing is incredibly resource intensive and expensive and that the city has had to create a brand new tow-yard in order to accommodate the RVs and vehicles seized during “Operation Westside Story”. Even more money and resources will be spent fighting lawsuits that challenge the constitutionality of OVO and appealing to the coastal commission, who called the last version of ordinance “onerous,” “drastic” and “draconian” I am outraged that city resources will be used to create more unsheltered homelessness and deepen cycles of poverty. Those very same city resources should be used for productive solutions that use city property for safe sleeping programs, help vehicles get registered, provide free sanitary methods for grey water disposal, and provide more refuse services (all services that would be of benefit to all community members).

The bottom line is people have nowhere else to go. It is not enough to include vague mention of safe sleeping programs while prioritizing criminalization of our most vulnerable neighbors. The Affiliated Faith Community (AFC) has been operating its SafeSpaces Parking Program for years and it is currently the ONLY resource being offered when police force people to move their vehicles under threat of ticketing and misdemeanors. They are required by law to provide a safe place to sleep when they displace someone from their survival shelter; however, as program director, Reverend Joseph Jacobs, shared at the city council meeting a month ago: Despite this reliance on referral to AFC (who operates 41 overnight parking spaces), the city has *never* funded their services and, recently, even refused to financially support expansion. Instead, these programs have been mentioned only as an afterthought, despite being proven to provide stability and bolster the ability to transition to housing, in addition to offering a more dignified survival option to being unsheltered. The city continues to be disingenuous about their support of existing programs and there are simply not enough alternative shelters and housing available.

We need action that prioritizes listening to and coordinating with experts: our houseless community, community advocates and service providers, researchers who study houselessness, and the County Health and Human Service Departments.

We demand services without the threat of criminalization! Do not allow OVO to become policy! Thank you,
Reggie

31.360 1.279
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Big Joe 77 <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2021 4:48 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Public Correspondence to City of Santa Cruz 10.26.2021 Council Agenda- Item 25: “n Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Santa Cruz Amending Title 10 “Vehicles and Traffic” at Chapter 10.04”
Honorable Mayor, Vice Mayor, and council,
I find that in your summary report you state:

As part of this approach, the city will implement a permit process that will allow individual vehicles to temporarily park on City streets overnight if, among other requirements, these individuals: (1) have applied to a safe parking or shelter program, (2) are unable to participate in a safe parking or shelter program due to lack of capacity, (3) the location of their vehicle will not cause public health, safety, welfare concerns, or nuisance conditions. These individuals will still be subject to citations or other appropriate law enforcement activity if they engage in otherwise illegal and/or nuisance behaviors (e.g.,dumping of trash, debris, and human waste onto City streets, sidewalks, and waterways, fires and criminal activities such as bicycle and other personal property theft, private water connections being used, and gasoline thefts) … knowing it to be unenforceable:
“The vast majority of infraction citations do not result in a fine or sentencing. Instead, more than 90% of those who receive citations do not appear on those citations. After multiple incidents of failure to appear, the person is sent to collections. Those who do appear often have the fines waived because they are indigent” (SCPD Chief Mills- Public Safety Committee statement to Item 4/ 06.30.2021).

So now what!
I see in your Summary Report that you continue to imply that you “partner” with the Association of Faith Based Charities to offer up to 30 spaces for oversized vehicles, but bring nothing in terms of resources to the table.

Your conversations with a local nonprofit service provider, revealed that it would cost approximately $328,000 to operate a safe parking program for 30 vehicles:
1- The city is in financial crisis. You can’t afford to be a “partner.” 2- There’s a heck of a lot more than 30 of these scrap hulks on city streets So now what!
I see in your Summary Report that you are proposing the “Safe Parking program” draft ordinance will return to Council within FOUR MONTHS! of the passing of this ordinance with a draft ready contract for services that includes costs, thus ensuring many more months of illegal dumping of trash, debris and human waste onto City streets, sidewalks, and waterways; fires associated with oversized vehicles; lack of access to neighborhood and coastal parking; and increased criminal activities in areas where oversized vehicles are parked, including theft of bicycles and other property, private water connections being used, and gasoline thefts.

At some point, you are going to have to realize that the needs of the City outweigh the needs of a few. Every day you kick the can, you are in violation of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Municipal Regional Permit, which could lead to enforcement actions by the Regional Water Quality Control Board.

31.361 1.280
2 Thank you for your time and consideration in this matter. --
Big Joe 77
Keepin' it Real
The linked image cannot be displayed. The file may have been moved, renamed, or deleted. Verify that the link points to the correct file and location.

31.362 1.281
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Ona Tigue <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2021 5:02 PM
To: City Council
Cc: Martine Watkins; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Renee Golder; Donna Meyers; Justin Cummings; Sandy Brown; Sonja Brunner; Lee Butler; Andrew Mills; Larry Imwalle Subject: Vote NO on Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Dear Council, <BR> <BR>The proposed Oversized Vehicles Ordinance (OVO) is unresearched, counterproductive, and unacceptable. <BR> <BR>At the September 21, 2021 council meeting, we learned that the goal of OVO is to give police enhanced tools to “move vehicles along”. According to the City Attorney, enforcing current environmental and nuisance laws is ineffectual. He said, “just writing a citation, even if it’s a misdemeanor, even if you could arrest someone and take them into custody, the way the court process works these days, they would be right back out on the street within an hour and go back to a parked RV and continue to engage in the conduct we’re trying to address”. It seems that instead of acknowledging that ticketing, towing, and writing misdemeanors are not an effective way of managing homelessness (as supported by decades of research), the city will double down and create a new tool to incarcerate people who cannot afford to comply with the OVO, all while not significantly providing resources that would help people to avoid engaging in so‐called “nuisance behaviors”. Many of these “nuisance behaviors” are acts of survival by our marginalized neighbors who have been abandoned by the city. The repeated reference to the need to address health and safety concerns, without acknowledging that the health and safety of people sleeping in vehicles for survival is severely impacted by removing their shelter is disgusting and clearly in opposition with Health In All Policies. <BR> <BR>The proposed solution, as outlined by Mills, is that OVO will allow the city to cite misdemeanor infractions, take an individual into custody, have the city attorney prosecute the individual, levy fines on a person living in poverty, and then tow their vehicle when they are unable to comply. Additionally, Andy Mills disclosed that towing is incredibly resource intensive and expensive and that the city has had to create a brand new tow‐yard in order to accommodate the RVs and vehicles seized during “Operation Westside Story”. Even more money and resources will be spent fighting lawsuits that challenge the constitutionality of OVO and appealing to the coastal commission, who called the last version of ordinance “onerous,” “drastic” and “draconian” I am outraged that city resources will be used to create more unsheltered homelessness and deepen cycles of poverty. Those very same city resources should be used for productive solutions that use city property for safe sleeping programs, help vehicles get registered, provide free sanitary methods for grey water disposal, and provide more refuse services (all services that would be of benefit to all community members). <BR> <BR> <BR>The bottom line is people have nowhere else to go. It is not enough to include vague mention of safe sleeping programs while prioritizing criminalization of our most vulnerable neighbors. The Affiliated Faith Community (AFC) has been operating its SafeSpaces Parking Program for years and it is currently the ONLY resource being offered when police force people to move their vehicles under threat of ticketing and misdemeanors. They are required by law to provide a safe place to sleep when they displace someone from their survival shelter; however, as program director, Reverend Joseph Jacobs, shared at the city council meeting a month ago: Despite this reliance on referral to AFC (who operates 41 overnight parking spaces), the city has *never* funded their services and, recently, even refused to financially support expansion. Instead, these programs have been mentioned only as an afterthought, despite being proven to provide stability and bolster the ability to transition to housing, in addition to offering a more dignified survival option to being unsheltered. The city continues to be disingenuous about their support of existing programs and there are simply not enough alternative shelters and housing available. <BR> <BR>We need action that prioritizes listening to and coordinating with experts: our houseless community, community

31.363 1.282
2 advocates and service providers, researchers who study houselessness, and the County Health and Human Service Departments. <BR> <BR>We demand services without the threat of criminalization! Do not allow OVO to become policy! <BR> <BR> <BR>Thank you, <BR> <BR><Ona Tigue > <BR> Sent from my iPhone

31.364 1.283
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Michael Menace <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2021 11:11 PM
To: City Council
Cc: Martine Watkins; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Renee Golder; Donna Meyers; Justin Cummings; Sandy Brown; Sonja Brunner; Lee Butler; Andrew Mills; Larry Imwalle Subject: Vote NO on Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Dear Council,
The proposed Oversized Vehicles Ordinance (OVO) is unresearched, counterproductive, and unacceptable.

At the September 21, 2021 council meeting, we learned that the goal of OVO is to give police enhanced tools to “move vehicles along”. According to the City Attorney, enforcing current environmental and nuisance laws is ineffectual. He said, “just writing a citation, even if it’s a misdemeanor, even if you could arrest someone and take them into custody, the way the court process works these days, they would be right back out on the street within an hour and go back to a parked RV and continue to engage in the conduct we’re trying to address”. It seems that instead of acknowledging that ticketing, towing, and writing misdemeanors are not an effective way of managing homelessness (as supported by decades of research), the city will double down and create a new tool to incarcerate people who cannot afford to comply with the OVO, all while not significantly providing resources that would help people to avoid engaging in so‐called “nuisance behaviors”. Many of these “nuisance behaviors” are acts of survival by our marginalized neighbors who have been abandoned by the city. The repeated reference to the need to address health and safety concerns, without acknowledging that the health and safety of people sleeping in vehicles for survival is severely impacted by removing their shelter is disgusting and clearly in opposition with Health In All Policies.

The proposed solution, as outlined by Mills, is that OVO will allow the city to cite misdemeanor infractions, take an individual into custody, have the city attorney prosecute the individual, levy fines on a person living in poverty, and then tow their vehicle when they are unable to comply. Additionally, Andy Mills disclosed that towing is incredibly resource intensive and expensive and that the city has had to create a brand new tow‐yard in order to accommodate the RVs and vehicles seized during “Operation Westside Story”. Even more money and resources will be spent fighting lawsuits that challenge the constitutionality of OVO and appealing to the coastal commission, who called the last version of ordinance “onerous,” “drastic” and “draconian” I am outraged that city resources will be used to create more unsheltered homelessness and deepen cycles of poverty. Those very same city resources should be used for productive solutions that use city property for safe sleeping programs, help vehicles get registered, provide free sanitary methods for grey water disposal, and provide more refuse services (all services that would be of benefit to all community members).

The bottom line is people have nowhere else to go. It is not enough to include vague mention of safe sleeping programs while prioritizing criminalization of our most vulnerable neighbors. The Affiliated Faith Community (AFC) has been operating its SafeSpaces Parking Program for years and it is currently the ONLY resource being offered when police force people to move their vehicles under threat of ticketing and misdemeanors. They are required by law to provide a safe place to sleep when they displace someone from their survival shelter; however, as program director, Reverend Joseph Jacobs, shared at the city council meeting a month ago:

Despite this reliance on referral to AFC (who operates 41 overnight parking spaces), the city has *never*

31.365 1.284
2 funded their services and, recently, even refused to financially support expansion. Instead, these programs have been mentioned only as an afterthought, despite being proven to provide stability and bolster the ability to transition to housing, in addition to offering a more dignified survival option to being unsheltered. The city continues to be disingenuous about their support of existing programs and there are simply not enough alternative shelters and housing available.

We need action that prioritizes listening to and coordinating with experts: our houseless community, community advocates and service providers, researchers who study houselessness, and the County Health and Human Service Departments.

We demand services without the threat of criminalization! Do not allow OVO to become policy! Thank you,
Michael Pavich

31.366 1.285
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bobb Lange <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, October 22, 2021 9:47 AM
To: City Council
Cc: Martine Watkins; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Renee Golder; Donna Meyers; Justin Cummings; Sandy Brown; Sonja Brunner; Lee Butler; Andrew Mills; Larry Imwalle Subject: Vote NO on Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Dear Council,
The proposed Oversized Vehicles Ordinance (OVO) is unresearched, counterproductive, and unacceptable.

At the September 21, 2021 council meeting, we learned that the goal of OVO is to give police enhanced tools to “move vehicles along”. According to the City Attorney, enforcing current environmental and nuisance laws is ineffectual. He said, “just writing a citation, even if it’s a misdemeanor, even if you could arrest someone and take them into custody, the way the court process works these days, they would be right back out on the street within an hour and go back to a parked RV and continue to engage in the conduct we’re trying to address”. It seems that instead of acknowledging that ticketing, towing, and writing misdemeanors are not an effective way of managing homelessness (as supported by decades of research), the city will double down and create a new tool to incarcerate people who cannot afford to comply with the OVO, all while not significantly providing resources that would help people to avoid engaging in so‐called “nuisance behaviors”. Many of these “nuisance behaviors” are acts of survival by our marginalized neighbors who have been abandoned by the city. The repeated reference to the need to address health and safety concerns, without acknowledging that the health and safety of people sleeping in vehicles for survival is severely impacted by removing their shelter is disgusting and clearly in opposition with Health In All Policies.

The proposed solution, as outlined by Mills, is that OVO will allow the city to cite misdemeanor infractions, take an individual into custody, have the city attorney prosecute the individual, levy fines on a person living in poverty, and then tow their vehicle when they are unable to comply. Additionally, Andy Mills disclosed that towing is incredibly resource intensive and expensive and that the city has had to create a brand new tow‐yard in order to accommodate the RVs and vehicles seized during “Operation Westside Story”. Even more money and resources will be spent fighting lawsuits that challenge the constitutionality of OVO and appealing to the coastal commission, who called the last version of ordinance “onerous,” “drastic” and “draconian” I am outraged that city resources will be used to create more unsheltered homelessness and deepen cycles of poverty. Those very same city resources should be used for productive solutions that use city property for safe sleeping programs, help vehicles get registered, provide free sanitary methods for grey water disposal, and provide more refuse services (all services that would be of benefit to all community members).

The bottom line is people have nowhere else to go. It is not enough to include vague mention of safe sleeping programs while prioritizing criminalization of our most vulnerable neighbors. The Affiliated Faith Community (AFC) has been operating its SafeSpaces Parking Program for years and it is currently the ONLY resource being offered when police force people to move their vehicles under threat of ticketing and misdemeanors. They are required by law to provide a safe place to sleep when they displace someone from their survival shelter; however, as program director, Reverend Joseph Jacobs, shared at the city council meeting a month ago:

Despite this reliance on referral to AFC (who operates 41 overnight parking spaces), the city has *never* funded their services and, recently, even refused to financially support expansion. Instead, these programs

31.367 1.286
2 have been mentioned only as an afterthought, despite being proven to provide stability and bolster the ability to transition to housing, in addition to offering a more dignified survival option to being unsheltered. The city continues to be disingenuous about their support of existing programs and there are simply not enough alternative shelters and housing available.

We need action that prioritizes listening to and coordinating with experts: our houseless community, community advocates and service providers, researchers who study houselessness, and the County Health and Human Service Departments. We demand services without the threat of criminalization! Do not allow OVO to become policy!
Thank you,
Robert Lange
Santa Cruz Resident

31.368 1.287
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Micah Breeden <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, October 22, 2021 10:17 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Overnight Parking Issues | Public Comment
Hello,
Our business is located on 207 McPherson Street in Santa Cruz.

Our business and employees have been negatively impacted over the past handful of years by violations of the No Parking from 12am - 6am policy on McPherson Street.

Here are just some of the items that we have had to deal with - RVs illegally dumping their sewage tanks into the gutter - People living in abandoned trailers with overflowing sewage tanks leaking into the street - Drug Deals and Drug Use
- Harassment of employees by individuals living in vehicles that are violating the parking laws - Extensive amounts of trash left behind when these vehicles finally move or are removed I recognize the magnitude of the issue and hope that you all do as well. While there is no one solution to resolve this issue, taking steps to implement partial solutions as we can is necessary at this point.

There are too many individuals taking advantage of the lack of clear policy regarding free lodging in their vehicles on local public streets that are negatively affecting the property owners, residents and our community as a whole.

I appreciate all of your efforts in working to address this (and the other) issues currently facing our community.

Sincerely,
Micah Breeden | Chief Financial Officer | Allterra Solar 207-B McPherson St | Santa Cruz, CA 95060 | office 831.425.2608 [email protected] | www.allterrasolar.com
Call us to Get a Free Quote Now

31.369 1.288
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Rachael Chavez <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, October 22, 2021 4:40 PM
To: Martine Watkins; Sonja Brunner; Donna Meyers; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; City Council; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; Sandy Brown; Lee Butler; Andrew Mills; Larry Imwalle
Subject: Please Reconsider the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance Hello,
I have previously sent you all data about the harmful and ineffective nature of criminalizing people who live in vehicles, but here is the link again. An actual social scientist from UCSF who studies the effects of criminalizing people who live in vehicles even called in at the last city council meeting to detail to you all how this policy will not achieve its stated goals and will cause direct harm to people living in vehicles and create more unsheltered homelessness in Santa Cruz.

If your goal truly is to mitigate "nuisance" behaviors then it is time to start listening to scientists, consulting with people who live outside and in their cars, and providing people with services without the threat of criminalization, anything short of that is just punishment for being poor and lacking resources.

I hope you'll read through This statement from the National Coalition for Housing Justice which succinctly describes the realities of criminalizing homelessness and reconsider your support of the oversized vehicle ordinance. I have copied some key aspects of the statement below:

This statement is an urgent call to the growing number of communities that are irresponsibly wasting money to criminalize the publicly visible symptoms of homelessness. These communities are prolonging homelessness rather than expediting connections to housing by leading with a law enforcement approach, rather than addressing the underlying causes of homelessness itself.

The enforcement of these laws trigger a series of deep and wide-ranging harms against individuals, families, and communities. These punishments can range from criminal charges, civil infractions, jail, or involuntary commitment, to the separation of families and the experience of physical danger and violence—none of which address the challenges that precipitated any person’s experience of homelessness.

All of the above punishments carry additional collateral consequences, which increase the punishment in significant ways and further the cycle of homelessness. Regardless of the original reason for interaction with law enforcement, that single interaction can make it more difficult to find both short-term and permanent housing. These interactions can also lead to losing employment, being denied new employment, and not being able to receive critical services and supports. All of these issues are significantly compounded along the lines of race, gender, disability, and sexual orientation.

Laws that criminalize homelessness may be enacted under the guise of safety or sanitation, but do not actually address either issue within the realities of living without shelter. In fact, some members of law enforcement have argued that the point of passing laws is to make

31.370 1.289
2 existing uncomfortable enough that people would move, and go out of sight, out of mind. The disruption caused by losing important belongings and medicine, by having sleep regularly interrupted, or by having to move frequently, can be very detrimental to physical and mental health. That is why the American Medical Association and creators of Health In All Policies, the American Public Health Association, have both condemned the criminalization of homelessness generally and evictions, or “sweeps” of encampments specifically.

Public health concerns such as trash, human waste, or used needles can all be addressed through constructive measures such as regular sanitation pick ups, portable toilets, or sharps containers without needing to resort to punitive measures that harm the health of people experiencing homelessness.

While law enforcement approaches are most often adopted in response to community complaints about visible homelessness, they don’t even succeed in reducing the visibility of homelessness. A comprehensive study found that “anti-homeless laws and enforcement fail to reduce urban disorder, but create instead a spatial churn in which homeless people circulate between neighborhoods and police jurisdictions rather than leaving public space.” After all, such approaches do not rehabilitate nor do they provide adequate services. They punish individuals for existing.

Criminalization costs communities a lot of money and wastes resources without increasing public safety. Because it is often unconstitutional, the criminalization of homelessness also opens local governments to legal liability and expensive lawsuits.

Criminalization policies and sweeps have also been condemned by courts as violating Fourth Amendment property rights and Fourteenth Amendment due process rights.

The criminalization of homelessness is also a matter of serious concern under international law.

Criminalization of homelessness is discriminatory and constitutes cruel and inhuman treatment, which violates our obligations under the Convention Against Torture and the International Covenant on Civil & Political Rights. Further, the criminalization of homelessness has a disparate racial impact, in violation of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination.

I hope you will read the statement in its entirety, though I expect many of you will ignore it and continue to push forward because, "we can get stuck in a loop of finding the flaw, sucked into the loop of not good enough".

The Oversized Vehicle Ordinance is not a new way to specifically target so-called nuisance behaviors, most of these behaviors being already illegal (though according to the city, hard to enforce because there is often no witness- which should be a good thing that we cannot charge someone with a "crime" without a witness or evidence). It only creates a new way to target people who are poor without providing any meaningful services that would interrupt these "nuisance" behaviors like frequent trash pick up, free black water disposal, or even just more bathrooms all over town, these things would make Santa Cruz better for all of us and DO NOT require criminalization to be done, as criminalization actively works against these goals. Combining (insufficient) services with criminalization is not a new or innovative tactic, it's what we've been doing in the bay area for decades, and it has not worked. It's time to do something different. -Rachael Chavez

31.371 1.290
3 Registered Nurse, Lower Ocean Resident

31.372 1.291
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Judi Grunstra <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 12:01 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Oct 26 meeting - Agenda Item 25 - over-sized vehicles Dear City Council,
I don't know whether it's regular practice for city staff to inform you of how other Bay Area cities are dealing with homeless issues.  Currently, the city of Mountain View is making decisions about allowing RV parking on city streets, and you might be interested in following that.  I believe a lawsuit has been under way.

I think Santa Cruz definitely needs to enforce violations of any ordinances that prohibit people living in RVs from dumping sewage or trash, hooking up illegally to electric power poles, starting fires, demonstrating clear threatening behavior, or otherwise causing health and safety problems for nearby residents and businesses.

Thank you.

Judi Grunstra

31.373 1.292
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Tamra Ancona <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 2:17 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Overnight RV parking
There must be a way to ensure Santa Cruz doesn’t fall into a worsening homeless blight.

I support designated safe parking lots but enough with the Delaware Street trash and other illegal  homeless parking.

Tamra

31.374 1.293
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Alan Goldstein <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 2:44 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Alan Goldstein
734 Chestnut St
SC 95060

31.375 1.294
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Craig Hamilton <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 2:45 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
Thank you for considering an Oversized Vehicle Ordinance! Our neighborhood is overrun with RV campers and the impact has been immense.

All of us on our street are concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

My wife and I heartily support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Thank you again for your attention to this issue!
Sincerely,
Craig Hamilton
202 Pelton Ave, Santa Cruz

31.376 1.295
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Christopher Yonge <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 2:48 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Oversized vehicle ordinance
Dear Council members,
Please do your best to control large "recreational vehicles" being parked long-term on Santa Cruz streets, with their consequent impact on waste management systems, local residents, and visual amenity. I understand there is a new ordinance under consideration that will tighten permitting and allow the local police to better enforce the existing and considered rules. This is way overdue.

Thank you! /Chris Yonge
Resident, Morrissey Boulevard

31.377 1.296
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Robin Clawson <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 2:49 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Robin Clawson

31.378 1.297
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Becky Nutt <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 2:53 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.   I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.  Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Becky and Daniel Nutt
Sent from my iPhone

31.379 1.298
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Kris <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 2:54 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Kristina Mitchell

31.380 1.299
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Doug Hellinger <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 2:54 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.  I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff. Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Doug Hellinger
(40+ year resident of Santa Cruz)

31.381 1.300
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Andrea Muzzi <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 2:56 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support RV Ordinance
Dear Council,
The area is unusable by locals who want to enjoy the butterflies or the Seymour Center.

The end of Delaware near Seymour center has become unusable for families. It’s very sketchy right there and we are now forced to pay for parking at both Natural Bridges and Seymour Center to enjoy the area. It is unsafe to park amongst the losers who inhabit the area.

Last week we decided to park at friends home on Dufour and ride the trail down to Seymour Center. Leaving Seymour center heading towards Iveta for lunch on our bikes ‐someone blew meth smoke from a glass pipe with a ball on the end right in mine and my 5 yr olds face as we were biking past. They were parked in a late model white Ford Explorer ‐3 men.

We are disgusted by the current scene in that area.

Thank you
Andrea
Sent from my iPhone

31.382 1.301
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: tom mcdannold <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 2:58 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Tom McDannold
2395 Delaware Ave.

Santa Cruz, CA

31.383 1.302
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Sam Bavaro <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 2:59 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Regards,
Sam Bavaro

31.384 1.303
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Maggie Ramirez <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 3:01 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members, I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.  I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.  Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Also, the Parking Department, needs to start working with SCPD to enforce the no parking overnight. The Parking Department has in most cases, refused to write tickets because they are afraid of the RV’s!  Their job is to write parking tickets.  If they are afraid to do that, then they should not be working in the Parking enforcement area!  Ted Donnelly and whoever else manages parking, needs to step up to the plate and be accountable.  They need to have at least one person who can work from 3am to noon most days who can go around and write tickets to all the cars, RV’s, etc. that park overnight where it says no parking.  Let’s be creative and come up with some solutions that don’t require too much more work.

Our city needs to try to make people accountable for breaking the laws.

Thanks
Maggie

31.385 1.304
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Alta Coffee <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 3:02 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
I have a business on Mission Street, Alta Organic Coffee Warehouse & Roasting Co.  Our Transit Van has been vandalized three times in the last 6 months.  The last time, they got under the van, drilled a hole in the gas tank, what gas they couldn’t catch poured out down the driveway and into the street.  I have spent thousands of dollars repairing my van and installing anti‐theft cameras. People have defecated in our yard and left trash.

I never see any police patrolling here.

I’m certain that the person that drilled a hole in my gas tank was one of the people parking their “oversize vehicles” derelict campers here on the Westside.

I don’t feel safe in this town anymore.  The homeless situation is totally out of control.  Friends that have visited from out of town have said how “Dirty” Santa Cruz is.

A very sad situation.

Patti Spooner
Alta Organic Coffee
2712 Mission St. SC 95060
831.427.3373

31.386 1.305
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: kathy <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 3:05 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Kathleen Nix
1901 Delaware Ave, Santa Cruz, CA

31.387 1.306
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Barbara Avona <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 3:06 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Barbara Avona

31.388 1.307
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Nancy Leatham <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 3:12 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Nancy Leatham
2395 Delaware
Santa Cruz

31.389 1.308
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Ray Chapman <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 3:12 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council,
I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Restricting oversized vehicles from parking within 100 feet of intersections will really help improve the sight distance for vehicles and pedestrians crossing or entering an intersection.

For over a week now, at Almar Ave and Ingalls St, there are oversized vehicles; one on each side of the intersection, completely blocking the view for drivers entering Almar Ave, making it difficult to enter from Ingalls St. safely. The current situation sometimes makes it necessary for large trucks to turn wider into the oncoming traffic lane, as well..

Sincerely,
Ray Chapman
Fair Ave

31.390 1.309
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Michelle Overbeck <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 3:17 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Michelle
Sent from my iPhone

31.391 1.310
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: [email protected]
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 3:17 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Dear Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles parked on our streets, and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste and personal items left behind, and the increased crime to our neighborhoods and businesses. I wholeheartedly support your efforts on passing the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff. Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Janet Romanowski

31.392 1.311
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Maya Crelan Ray <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 3:17 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses. I live close to Natural Bridges and see and feel the issues in my neighborhood.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Maya Crelan Ray

31.393 1.312
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Jessica Vargas <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, October 22, 2021 5:25 PM
To: City Council
Cc: Martine Watkins; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Renee Golder; Donna Meyers; Justin Cummings; Sandy Brown; Sonja Brunner; Lee Butler; Andrew Mills; Larry Imwalle Subject: Vote NO on Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Dear Council,
The proposed Oversized Vehicles Ordinance (OVO) is unresearched, counterproductive, and unacceptable. At the September 21, 2021 council meeting, we learned that the goal of OVO is to give police enhanced tools to “move vehicles along”. According to the City Attorney, enforcing current environmental and nuisance laws is ineffectual. He said, “just writing a citation, even if it’s a misdemeanor, even if you could arrest someone and take them into custody, the way the court process works these days, they would be right back out on the street within an hour and go back to a parked RV and continue to engage in the conduct we’re trying to address”. It seems that instead of acknowledging that ticketing, towing, and writing misdemeanors are not an effective way of managing homelessness (as supported by decades of research), the city will double down and create a new tool to incarcerate people who cannot afford to comply with the OVO, all while not significantly providing resources that would help people to avoid engaging in so‐called “nuisance behaviors”. Many of these “nuisance behaviors” are acts of survival by our marginalized neighbors who have been abandoned by the city. The repeated reference to the need to address health and safety concerns, without acknowledging that the health and safety of people sleeping in vehicles for survival is severely impacted by removing their shelter is disgusting and clearly in opposition with Health In All Policies. The proposed solution, as outlined by Mills, is that OVO will allow the city to cite misdemeanor infractions, take an individual into custody, have the city attorney prosecute the individual, levy fines on a person living in poverty, and then tow their vehicle when they are unable to comply. Additionally, Andy Mills disclosed that towing is incredibly resource intensive and expensive and that the city has had to create a brand new tow‐yard in order to accommodate the RVs and vehicles seized during “Operation Westside Story”. Even more money and resources will be spent fighting lawsuits that challenge the constitutionality of OVO and appealing to the coastal commission, who called the last version of ordinance “onerous,” “drastic” and “draconian” I am outraged that city resources will be used to create more unsheltered homelessness and deepen cycles of poverty. Those very same city resources should be used for productive solutions that use city property for safe sleeping programs, help vehicles get registered, provide free sanitary methods for grey water disposal, and provide more refuse services (all services that would be of benefit to all community members). The bottom line is people have nowhere else to go. It is not enough to include vague mention of safe sleeping programs while prioritizing criminalization of our most vulnerable neighbors. The Affiliated Faith Community (AFC) has been operating its SafeSpaces Parking Program for years and it is currently the ONLY resource being offered when police force people to move their vehicles under threat of ticketing and misdemeanors. They are required by law to provide a safe place to sleep when they displace someone from their survival shelter; however, as program director, Reverend Joseph Jacobs, shared at the city council meeting a month ago: Despite this reliance on referral to AFC (who operates 41 overnight parking spaces), the city has *never* funded their services and, recently, even refused to financially support expansion. Instead, these programs have been mentioned only as an afterthought, despite being proven to provide stability and bolster the ability to transition to housing, in addition to offering a more dignified survival option to being unsheltered. The city continues to be disingenuous about their support of existing programs and there are simply not enough alternative shelters

31.394 1.313
2 and housing available. <BR> <BR>We need action that prioritizes listening to and coordinating with experts:
our houseless community, community advocates and service providers, researchers who study houselessness, and the County Health and Human Service Departments. We demand services without the threat of criminalization! Do not allow OVO to become policy!
Thank you,
Jessica Vargas
She/her/hers
Sent from my iPhone

31.395 1.314
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Gabe Luboff <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 11:52 AM
To: City Council
Cc: Andrew Mills; Donna Meyers; Justin Cummings; Lee Butler; Larry Imwalle; Martine Watkins; Renee Golder; Sandy Brown; Sonja Brunner; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson Subject: Vote NO on Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Dear Council,
The proposed Oversized Vehicles Ordinance (OVO) is unresearched, counterproductive, and unacceptable.

At the September 21, 2021 council meeting, we learned that the goal of OVO is to give police enhanced tools to “move vehicles along”. According to the City Attorney, enforcing current environmental and nuisance laws is ineffectual. He said, “just writing a citation, even if it’s a misdemeanor, even if you could arrest someone and take them into custody, the way the court process works these days, they would be right back out on the street within an hour and go back to a parked RV and continue to engage in the conduct we’re trying to address”. It seems that instead of acknowledging that ticketing, towing, and writing misdemeanors are not an effective way of managing homelessness (as supported by decades of research), the city will double down and create a new tool to incarcerate people who cannot afford to comply with the OVO, all while not significantly providing resources that would help people to avoid engaging in so-called “nuisance behaviors”. Many of these “nuisance behaviors” are acts of survival by our marginalized neighbors who have been abandoned by the city. The repeated reference to the need to address health and safety concerns, without acknowledging that the health and safety of people sleeping in vehicles for survival is severely impacted by removing their shelter is disgusting and clearly in opposition with Health In All Policies.

The proposed solution, as outlined by Mills, is that OVO will allow the city to cite misdemeanor infractions, take an individual into custody, have the city attorney prosecute the individual, levy fines on a person living in poverty, and then tow their vehicle when they are unable to comply. Additionally, Andy Mills disclosed that towing is incredibly resource intensive and expensive and that the city has had to create a brand new tow-yard in order to accommodate the RVs and vehicles seized during “Operation Westside Story”. Even more money and resources will be spent fighting lawsuits that challenge the constitutionality of OVO and appealing to the coastal commission, who called the last version of ordinance “onerous,” “drastic” and “draconian” I am outraged that city resources will be used to create more unsheltered homelessness and deepen cycles of poverty.

Those very same city resources should be used for productive solutions that use city property for safe sleeping programs, help vehicles get registered, provide free sanitary methods for grey water disposal, and provide more refuse services (all services that would be of benefit to all community members).

The bottom line is people have nowhere else to go. It is not enough to include vague mention of safe sleeping programs while prioritizing criminalization of our most vulnerable neighbors. The Affiliated Faith Community (AFC) has been operating its SafeSpaces Parking Program for years and it is currently the ONLY resource being offered when police force people to move their vehicles under threat of ticketing and misdemeanors. They are required by law to provide a safe place to sleep when they displace someone from their survival shelter; however, as program director, Reverend Joseph Jacobs, shared at the city council meeting a month ago: Despite this reliance on referral to AFC (who operates 41 overnight parking spaces), the city has *never* funded their services and, recently, even refused to financially support expansion. Instead, these programs have been mentioned only as an afterthought, despite being proven to provide stability and bolster the ability to transition

31.396 1.315
2 to housing, in addition to offering a more dignified survival option to being unsheltered. The city continues to be disingenuous about their support of existing programs and there are simply not enough alternative shelters and housing available.

We need action that prioritizes listening to and coordinating with experts: our houseless community, community advocates and service providers, researchers who study houselessness, and the County Health and Human Service Departments.

We demand services without the threat of criminalization! Do not allow OVO to become policy! Thank you,
Gabe Luboff

31.397 1.316
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Lindsay Lauver <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 12:24 PM
To: City Council
Cc: Martine Watkins; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Renee Golder; Donna Meyers; Justin Cummings; Sandy Brown; Sonja Brunner; Lee Butler; Andrew Mills; Larry Imwalle Subject: Vote NO on Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Dear Council,
The proposed Oversized Vehicles Ordinance (OVO) is unresearched, counterproductive, and unacceptable.

At the September 21, 2021 council meeting, we learned that the goal of OVO is to give police enhanced tools to “move vehicles along”. According to the City Attorney, enforcing current environmental and nuisance laws is ineffectual. He said, “just writing a citation, even if it’s a misdemeanor, even if you could arrest someone and take them into custody, the way the court process works these days, they would be right back out on the street within an hour and go back to a parked RV and continue to engage in the conduct we’re trying to address”. It seems that instead of acknowledging that ticketing, towing, and writing misdemeanors are not an effective way of managing homelessness (as supported by decades of research), the city will double down and create a new tool to incarcerate people who cannot afford to comply with the OVO, all while not significantly providing resources that would help people to avoid engaging in so‐called “nuisance behaviors”. Many of these “nuisance behaviors” are acts of survival by our marginalized neighbors who have been abandoned by the city. The repeated reference to the need to address health and safety concerns, without acknowledging that the health and safety of people sleeping in vehicles for survival is severely impacted by removing their shelter is disgusting and clearly in opposition with Health In All Policies.

The proposed solution, as outlined by Mills, is that OVO will allow the city to cite misdemeanor infractions, take an individual into custody, have the city attorney prosecute the individual, levy fines on a person living in poverty, and then tow their vehicle when they are unable to comply. Additionally, Andy Mills disclosed that towing is incredibly resource intensive and expensive and that the city has had to create a brand new tow‐yard in order to accommodate the RVs and vehicles seized during “Operation Westside Story”. Even more money and resources will be spent fighting lawsuits that challenge the constitutionality of OVO and appealing to the coastal commission, who called the last version of ordinance “onerous,” “drastic” and “draconian” I am outraged that city resources will be used to create more unsheltered homelessness and deepen cycles of poverty. Those very same city resources should be used for productive solutions that use city property for safe sleeping programs, help vehicles get registered, provide free sanitary methods for grey water disposal, and provide more refuse services (all services that would be of benefit to all community members).

The bottom line is people have nowhere else to go. It is not enough to include vague mention of safe sleeping programs while prioritizing criminalization of our most vulnerable neighbors. The Affiliated Faith Community (AFC) has been operating its SafeSpaces Parking Program for years and it is currently the ONLY resource being offered when police force people to move their vehicles under threat of ticketing and misdemeanors. They are required by law to provide a safe place to sleep when they displace someone from their survival shelter; however, as program director, Reverend Joseph Jacobs, shared at the city council meeting a month ago:

Despite this reliance on referral to AFC (who operates 41 overnight parking spaces), the city has *never* funded their services and, recently, even refused to financially support expansion. Instead, these programs have been mentioned only as an afterthought, despite being proven to provide stability and bolster the ability

31.398 1.317
2 to transition to housing, in addition to offering a more dignified survival option to being unsheltered. The city continues to be disingenuous about their support of existing programs and there are simply not enough alternative shelters and housing available.

We need action that prioritizes listening to and coordinating with experts: our houseless community, community advocates and service providers, researchers who study houselessness, and the County Health and Human Service Departments..

We demand services without the threat of criminalization! Do not allow OVO to become policy! Thank you,
Lindsay
Sent from my iPhone

31.399 1.318
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Anica Leon-Weil <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 2:34 PM
To: City Council
Cc: Martine Watkins; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Renee Golder; Donna Meyers; Justin Cummings; Sandy Brown; Sonja Brunner; Lee Butler; Andrew Mills; Larry Imwalle Subject: Vote NO on Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Dear Council,
The proposed Oversized Vehicles Ordinance (OVO) is unresearched, counterproductive, unacceptable, not to mention inhumane.

At the September 21, 2021 council meeting, we learned that the goal of OVO is to give police enhanced tools to “move vehicles along”. According to the City Attorney, enforcing current environmental and nuisance laws is ineffectual. He said, “just writing a citation, even if it’s a misdemeanor, even if you could arrest someone and take them into custody, the way the court process works these days, they would be right back out on the street within an hour and go back to a parked RV and continue to engage in the conduct we’re trying to address”. It seems that instead of acknowledging that ticketing, towing, and writing misdemeanors are not an effective way of managing homelessness (as supported by decades of research), the city will double down and create a new tool to incarcerate people who cannot afford to comply with the OVO, all while not significantly providing resources that would help people to avoid engaging in so-called “nuisance behaviors”. Many of these “nuisance behaviors” are acts of survival by our marginalized neighbors who have been abandoned by the city. The repeated reference to the need to address health and safety concerns, without acknowledging that the health and safety of people sleeping in vehicles for survival is severely impacted by removing their shelter is disgusting and clearly in opposition with Health In All Policies.

The proposed solution, as outlined by Mills, is that OVO will allow the city to cite misdemeanor infractions, take an individual into custody, have the city attorney prosecute the individual, levy fines on a person living in poverty, and then tow their vehicle when they are unable to comply. Additionally, Andy Mills disclosed that towing is incredibly resource intensive and expensive and that the city has had to create a brand new tow-yard in order to accommodate the RVs and vehicles seized during “Operation Westside Story”. Even more money and resources will be spent fighting lawsuits that challenge the constitutionality of OVO and appealing to the coastal commission, who called the last version of ordinance “onerous,” “drastic” and “draconian” I am outraged that city resources will be used to create more unsheltered homelessness and deepen cycles of poverty.

Those very same city resources should be used for productive solutions that use city property for safe sleeping programs, help vehicles get registered, provide free sanitary methods for grey water disposal, and provide more refuse services (all services that would be of benefit to all community members).

The bottom line is people have nowhere else to go. It is not enough to include vague mention of safe sleeping programs while prioritizing criminalization of our most vulnerable neighbors. The Affiliated Faith Community (AFC) has been operating its SafeSpaces Parking Program for years and it is currently the ONLY resource being offered when police force people to move their vehicles under threat of ticketing and misdemeanors. They are required by law to provide a safe place to sleep when they displace someone from their survival shelter; however, as program director, Reverend Joseph Jacobs, shared at the city council meeting a month ago: Despite this reliance on referral to AFC (who operates 41 overnight parking spaces), the city has *never* funded their services and, recently, even refused to financially support expansion. Instead, these programs have been

31.400 1.319
2 mentioned only as an afterthought, despite being proven to provide stability and bolster the ability to transition to housing, in addition to offering a more dignified survival option to being unsheltered. The city continues to be disingenuous about their support of existing programs and there are simply not enough alternative shelters and housing available.

We need action that prioritizes listening to and coordinating with experts: our houseless community, community advocates and service providers, researchers who study houselessness, and the County Health and Human Service Departments.

We demand services without the threat of criminalization! Do not allow OVO to become policy! Thank you,
Anica Leon-Weil

31.401 1.320
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: JAMES MCGOWAN <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 3:25 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
James C McGowan
423 Laurent St
Santa Cruz, CA 05060
831‐426‐4493

31.402 1.321
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Mary Kline-Kaye <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 3:34 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Mary KlineKaye

31.403 1.322
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Dennis Hagen <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 3:34 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Please support the proposed Oversized Vehicle Ordinance Dear Council Members,
In my neighborhood, I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste and the increased crime.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Dennis Hagen
322 Pelton Ave

31.404 1.323
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: El Solway <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 3:41 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Dear City Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely, Ellen Solway

31.405 1.324
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Kristin Reichmuth <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 3:43 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
To Whom it may concern,
I am concerned about the growing number of oversized vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support the oversized vehicle ordinance currently under consideration by the council and city staff.

Specifically I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of recreational vehicles on city streets and in public spaces as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Kristin Reichmuth
946 W Cliff Dr
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
Scanned by McAfee and confirmed virus-free.

31.406 1.325
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Ryan Reber <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 3:45 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,<BR><BR>I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.  <BR><BR>I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.<BR><BR>Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.<BR><BR>Sincerely,<BR><BR> Get rid of these broke down, disgusting, feces leaking RV’s please Ryan Reber

31.407 1.326
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Suzanne T <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 3:51 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members, I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses. I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff. Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance. I think there should be govt land provided where they can park for nominal fee and set limits on how long.

Sincerely,
Suzanne Teixeira
Concerned citizen
--
Suzanne Teixeira
Bailey Properties
Circle of Champions
Website: SuzanneTeixeira.com
C: 831-345-2060
Dre: 00923308

31.408 1.327
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Chris <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 3:51 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
The lower paragraph is, of course, a template. This paragraph is mine! Since the mid 1990s, I have been complaining about motorhomes on residential streets. At that time it was a small Toyota Odyssey parked on Woodrow, an ice cream orange one at Circle Church driven erratically, and the constant "drug den" at Two Trees on West Cliff Drive (which the Parks Department closed down). Now we have hordes of between 10 to 20 Motorhomes, busses, trailers, large vans on Delaware and near or on Columbia, Pelton, Garfield Park, Library on Woodrow, or near CVS on Mission Street. I am only familiar with the west side of Santa Cruz, so I am uninformed of many parts of Santa Cruz. My residence is facing West Cliff Drive, but the side of the building is facing Columbia Street. These unsafe vehicles certainly do not belong in this area at night. Please please pass this ordinance! Tourists enjoying West Cliff Drive tours is completely different than setting up a home with no permission.

Council Members, I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses. I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff. Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance. Sincerely,
Chris Jordan
890 West Cliff Drive

31.409 1.328
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Margaret Plageman <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 3:52 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members, I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.  I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance. i do not feel safe with random, huge RV’s spending the weekend in front of my house..last year an  RV  owner decided
it wad OK to fill his water tank from my hose (even after  my neighbor told him he was  stealing)… his response was “she’s not home!”.   my water bill wad $300……
sincerely,
Margaret Plageman. 115 Merced
Sincerely,<BR><BR>
Sent from my iPhone

31.410 1.329
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: am hurd <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 3:55 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,<BR><BR>I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.  <BR><BR>I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.<BR><BR>Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.<BR><BR>Sincerely,<BR><BR>My block constantly has RVs parked for days and weeks at a time. If one leaves another takes it’s place. The people that surround or enter the RVs also take over the sidewalks by laying, sitting or tenting themselves among the trash around them. This is a very unhealthy and in humane way of being. Some also appear to be displaying behaviors of unstableness or under influence of drugs and alcohol. Please, please help us long term residents by restricting RVs of any kind on our neighborhood streets. We are tired and feel unsafe. We used to have pride in our beautiful Santa Cruz, now we don’t know if we will step on feces or needles.

Sent from my iPhone

31.411 1.330
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Vicki Traylor <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 3:59 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,<BR><BR>I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.  <BR><BR>I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.<BR><BR>Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.<BR><BR>Sincerely,<BR><BR> Sent from my iPad

31.412 1.331
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Janet Allinger <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 4:02 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.  I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Thank you, the Allinger’s

31.413 1.332
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Dion Johnson <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 4:07 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,<BR><BR>I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.  <BR><BR>I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.<BR><BR>Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.<BR><BR>Sincerely,<BR><BR> Sent from my iPhone

31.414 1.333
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Richard & Margie Shull <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 4:11 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members, I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses. I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff. Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance. Sincerely,
Richard and Margie Shull
115 Harvard St.

Santa Cruz

31.415 1.334
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Diane Brookes <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 4:16 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members, I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses. I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff. Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Diane Brookes

31.416 1.335
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Jerald Spodick <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 4:18 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Jerry Spodick
304 Darwin Street
Santa Cruz  95062

31.417 1.336
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Jim Reichmuth <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 4:20 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
To Whom it may concern,

I am concerned about the growing number of oversized vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support the oversized vehicle ordinance currently under consideration by the council and city staff.

Specifically I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of recreational vehicles on city streets and in public spaces as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively allow them to enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
James Reichmuth
946 W CLIFF DR
SANTA CRUZ, CA 95060

31.418 1.337
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: [email protected]
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 4:24 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Chris Somple
Sent from my iPhone

31.419 1.338
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Harold Schmidt <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 4:30 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely, Harold Schmidt

31.420 1.339
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Charlene Wall <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 4:35 PM
To: City Council
Cc: Mike Warren; [email protected]
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members, I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses. I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

We live on Delaware Ave and no longer feel safe given the RVs, the garbage and the human waste that is now prevalent and tolerated by the city.

Sincerely,
Charlene wall-Warren
Sent from my iPhone

31.421 1.340
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Cindy Johnson <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 4:36 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
As a homeowner on the Westside of Santa Cruz, I support this ordinance.

C. Schmidt
Council Members,<BR><BR>I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.  <BR><BR>I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.<BR><BR>Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.<BR><BR>Sincerely,<BR><BR> Sent from my iPhone

31.422 1.341
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Andromeda Scheller <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 1:01 PM
To: City Council
Cc: Martine Watkins; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Renee Golder; Donna Meyers; Justin Cummings; Sandy Brown; Sonja Brunner; Lee Butler; Andrew Mills; Larry Imwalle Subject: Vote NO on Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Dear Council,
The proposed Oversized Vehicles Ordinance (OVO) is unresearched, counterproductive, and unacceptable.

At the September 21, 2021 council meeting, we learned that the goal of OVO is to give police enhanced tools to “move vehicles along”. According to the City Attorney, enforcing current environmental and nuisance laws is ineffectual. He said, “just writing a citation, even if it’s a misdemeanor, even if you could arrest someone and take them into custody, the way the court process works these days, they would be right back out on the street within an hour and go back to a parked RV and continue to engage in the conduct we’re trying to address”. It seems that instead of acknowledging that ticketing, towing, and writing misdemeanors are not an effective way of managing homelessness (as supported by decades of research), the city will double down and create a new tool to incarcerate people who cannot afford to comply with the OVO, all while not significantly providing resources that would help people to avoid engaging in so-called “nuisance behaviors”. Many of these “nuisance behaviors” are acts of survival by our marginalized neighbors who have been abandoned by the city. The repeated reference to the need to address health and safety concerns, without acknowledging that the health and safety of people sleeping in vehicles for survival is severely impacted by removing their shelter is disgusting and clearly in opposition with Health In All Policies.

The proposed solution, as outlined by Mills, is that OVO will allow the city to cite misdemeanor infractions, take an individual into custody, have the city attorney prosecute the individual, levy fines on a person living in poverty, and then tow their vehicle when they are unable to comply. Additionally, Andy Mills disclosed that towing is incredibly resource intensive and expensive and that the city has had to create a brand new tow-yard in order to accommodate the RVs and vehicles seized during “Operation Westside Story”. Even more money and resources will be spent fighting lawsuits that challenge the constitutionality of OVO and appealing to the coastal commission, who called the last version of ordinance “onerous,” “drastic” and “draconian” I am outraged that city resources will be used to create more unsheltered homelessness and deepen cycles of poverty.

Those very same city resources should be used for productive solutions that use city property for safe sleeping programs, help vehicles get registered, provide free sanitary methods for grey water disposal, and provide more refuse services (all services that would be of benefit to all community members).

The bottom line is people have nowhere else to go. It is not enough to include vague mention of safe sleeping programs while prioritizing criminalization of our most vulnerable neighbors. The Affiliated Faith Community (AFC) has been operating its SafeSpaces Parking Program for years and it is currently the ONLY resource being offered when police force people to move their vehicles under threat of ticketing and misdemeanors. They are required by law to provide a safe place to sleep when they displace someone from their survival shelter; however, as program director, Reverend Joseph Jacobs, shared at the city council meeting a month ago: Despite this reliance on referral to AFC (who operates 41 overnight parking spaces), the city has *never* funded their services and, recently, even refused to financially support expansion. Instead, these programs have been mentioned only as an afterthought, despite being proven to provide stability and bolster the ability to transition

31.423 1.342
2 to housing, in addition to offering a more dignified survival option to being unsheltered. The city continues to be disingenuous about their support of existing programs and there are simply not enough alternative shelters and housing available.

We need action that prioritizes listening to and coordinating with experts: our houseless community, community advocates and service providers, researchers who study houselessness, and the County Health and Human Service Departments.

We demand services without the threat of criminalization! Do not allow OVO to become policy! Thank you,
Andromeda Scheller

31.424 1.343
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Liz Fritz <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 6:12 PM
To: City Council; Donna Meyers; Renee Golder; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Sonja Brunner; Justin Cummings; Sandy Brown; Martine Watkins
Subject: Support For Oversided Vehicle Ordinance With Edits Dear City Council,
I am emailing you again to voice my family’s support for the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance if and only if enforcement of the ordinance is independent of the safe parking program and residential annual oversized parking permits are limited to one (1) per address and require current address documentation.

My family GREATLY appreciates you addressing the issue of illegal RV’s in our neighborhood. We hold compassion for these individuals and support safe spaces for them but their illegal parking cannot take precedent over the safety of our tax-paying, involved community of businesses, families, children, schools and parks.

Thank you,
Liz Fritz
F2 Strategy Co-Founder | Chief Commercial Officer
Phone: 650.400.4323
Email: [email protected]

31.425 1.344
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: jfbergs <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 6:28 PM
To: City Council; Donna Meyers; Renee Golder; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Sonja Brunner; Justin Cummings; Sandy Brown; Martine Watkins
Subject: Support For Oversided Vehicle Ordinance With Edits Dear City Council, I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance if and only if enforcement of the ordinance is independent of the safe parking program and residential annual oversized parking permits are limited to one (1) per address and require current address documentation.

Sent via the Samsung Galaxy S21 5G, an AT&T 5G smartphone

31.426 1.345
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Tessy Paikeday <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 6:29 PM
To: City Council; Donna Meyers; Renee Golder; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Sonja Brunner; Justin Cummings; Sandy Brown; Martine Watkins
Subject: Support For Oversided Vehicle Ordinance With Edits Dear City Council, I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance. Thank you for your attention to this important matter.

Tessy

31.427 1.346
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Dennis Stewart <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 6:53 PM
To: City Council; Donna Meyers; Renee Golder; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Sonja Brunner; Justin Cummings; Sandy Brown; Martine Watkins
Subject: Support For Oversided Vehicle Ordinance With Edits Dear City Council,
We support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance if and only if enforcement of the ordinance is independent of the safe parking program and residential annual oversized parking permits are limited to one (1) per address and require current address documentation.

Thank you for listening to the needs and interests of your constituents, and preserving the integrity of our residential neighborhoods.

Dennis and Martha Stewart

31.428 1.347
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Ashley Muse <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 8:06 PM
To: City Council; Donna Meyers; Renee Golder; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Sonja Brunner; Justin Cummings; Sandy Brown; Martine Watkins
Subject: Support For Oversided Vehicle Ordinance With Edits Dear City Council, I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance if and only if enforcement of the ordinance is independent of the safe parking program and residential annual oversized parking permits are limited to one (1) per address and require current address documentation.

31.429 1.348
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Doug McGuire <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 6:45 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Douglas McGuire

31.430 1.349
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Brian Garcia <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 4:31 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Please Support Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
Please help, this is completely out of hand.

Sincerely,
Brian Garcia
259 Chico Ave

31.431 1.350
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Anne Elliott <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 4:39 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Anne Elliott
Sent from my iPhone

31.432 1.351
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: thomas demeo <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 4:43 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Sent from my iPhone

31.433 1.352
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Jean-Claude Le Duc <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 4:51 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,<BR><BR>I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.  <BR><BR>I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.<BR><BR>Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.<BR><BR>Sincerely,<BR><BR> Sent from my iPhone

31.434 1.353
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Hallie Richmond <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 4:52 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance!
Dear Council Members,
I am yet another citizen of the City of Santa Cruz who is concerned about the number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

I would like to see MORE strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Thank you!!
Hallie Richmond
Sent from my iPhone

31.435 1.354
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Amanda Pfeffermann <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 4:54 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members, I am very concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses. I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff. Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Amanda Pfeffermann

31.436 1.355
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Lynn Richards <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 4:54 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Lynn Richards
Sent from my iPhone

31.437 1.356
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Perry Peers <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 4:57 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members, I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses. I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff. Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Living on Delaware we have to deal with the smell of urine when walking down the street it’s very disgusting.

Sincerely,
Perry Peers

31.438 1.357
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: David Brick <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 5:09 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Please enact more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
David Brick
101 Alta Vista Drive
Santa Cruz

31.439 1.358
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: James Schwartz <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 5:24 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,

James L. Schwartz

31.440 1.359
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Marvin Christie <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 5:27 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am a local business owner and city resident who is concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Marvin Christie

31.441 1.360
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: kathy Pyle <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 5:43 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,<BR><BR>I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.  <BR><BR>I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.<BR><BR>Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.<BR><BR>Sincerely,<BR><BR> Sent from my iPhone

31.442 1.361
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Mara Alverson <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 5:44 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff. Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Thank you for your service,
Mara Alverson
Licensed Marriage and Family Therapist
Santa Cruz, California
831-588-3013
This electronic communication may contain information that is confidential. Electronic communications are not secure. Please do not mail correspondence you wish to keep private. I can be reached by phone at 831-588-3013. Thank you for you courtesy and consideration in this security matter.

Sessions not cancelled 48 hours in advance will be charged at the full amount.

31.443 1.362
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Sarah Schwegler <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 5:50 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Dear Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Thank you!
Best
Sarah
Sent from my iPhone

31.444 1.363
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: [email protected]
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 5:56 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
The number of oversized vehicles on Natural Bridges and Mission is alarming. In the past year I have seen domestic violence, dangerous dogs, feces in the sidewalk, unaccompanied children playing in the streets, fires and enormous amounts of trash.

I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Christian
West side Santa Cruz
Sent from my iPhone

31.445 1.364
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: kathy Pyle <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 5:57 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Oversized vehicles
Sent from my iPhone please city council members,  vote to make it legal for law enforcement to get these vehicles  off of our streets and our neighborhoods. I have lived in the Westside for 25 years. When we moved here, it was such a wonderful place to live.  Now, we have derelict vehicles all over our neighborhood, filled with people not from here who throw their trash wherever and don't care about those who live here.  We love and cherish Santa Cruz!  Please help us save it.  Gordon and Kathy Pyle

31.446 1.365
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: NICHOLAS MEYER <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 6:04 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Support ordinance
Hello,
I support the oversized vehicle ordinance.

Thank you
Nick Meyer
Sent from my iPhone

31.447 1.366
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: nancy maynard <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 6:07 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Y3s. Isupport the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses. Our town needs to do something now.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,

31.448 1.367
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Richard Beach <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 6:09 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Richard and Susan Beach
674 High St.

Santa Cruz, Ca 95060

31.449 1.368
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: harry rasmussen <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 6:12 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,<BR><BR>I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.  <BR><BR>I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.<BR><BR>Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.<BR><BR>Sincerely,<BR><BR> Sent from my iPhone

31.450 1.369
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Angelique Schuppek <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 6:13 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Support For Oversided Vehicle Ordinance With Edits Dear City Council,
I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance if and only if enforcement of the ordinance is independent of the safe parking program and residential annual oversized parking permits are limited to one (1) per address and require current address documentation.

Thank you,
Angelique Schuppek

31.451 1.370
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: lynne martinez <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 6:13 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members, I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses. I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff. Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Also support the County of Santa Cruz so the RV’s don’t move out of the city and into the rest of Santa Cruz County. Work with County Board of Supervisors to not start a game of RV’s moving into the rest of the county.

Thank you,
Lynne Martinez

31.452 1.371
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Tom <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 9:24 PM
To: City Council; Donna Meyers; Renee Golder; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Sonja Brunner; Justin Cummings; Sandy Brown; Martine Watkins
Subject: Support For Oversided Vehicle Ordinance With Edits Dear City Council,
I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance if and only if enforcement of the ordinance is independent of the safe parking program and residential annual oversized parking permits are limited to one (1) per address and require current address documentation.

Thank you,
Thomas Gordon
Sent from my iPad...excuse typos.

31.453 1.372
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Derek Mori <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 6:29 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses. <BR><BR>I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.<BR><BR>Sincerely,<BR><BR>

31.454 1.373
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Jeff Moise <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 6:30 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members, my name is Jeff Moise and I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.  I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff. Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.  Sincerely,
Jeffrey Moise

31.455 1.374
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: sonia breneisen <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 6:36 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Support For Oversided Vehicle Ordinance With Edits Dear City Council, I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance if and only if enforcement of the ordinance is independent of the safe parking program and residential annual oversized parking permits are limited to one (1) per address and require current address documentation.

31.456 1.375
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Doug McGuire <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 6:45 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Douglas McGuire

31.457 1.376
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: sonia breneisen <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 6:46 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members, I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses. I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff. Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance. Sincerely,
When will something get resolved with these dilapidated rvs the riff raff that comes with it.

No parking in neighborhoods, near schools, next to state parks which will eventually be destroyed by there lack of concern.

They are not good members of the community. It’s the big Pity Party Mentality.

Sonia Brown

31.458 1.377
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Paul G <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 6:59 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses. I’ve seen this every day for three years on Schaefer and Delaware when I walk my dog at the Marine Lab. The drug use, crazy behavior and sewage dumping is unacceptable.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Paul Gallagher
Sent from my iPad

31.459 1.378
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Candice Loero <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 7:05 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely, Candice Loero

31.460 1.379
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: JDC <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 7:21 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Joe Collins
120 Manor Ave W
Santa Cruz CA

31.461 1.380
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: delozmith <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 7:31 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Vehicle parking amendment
I would like to encourage city council members to pass something or do something to manage the oversized vehicles being lived in throughout our city.  I’d also like to encourage you to not bind your hands to upholding laws that are currently on the books or any you may pass because you are unable to meet the quota of safe parking spaces laid out in the current proposal.

The environmental destruction that is occurring due to homelessness and the city’s lack of upholding laws related to this population is the single most frustrating issue as a citizen.  As a parent with children it seems as if this city government is more interested in not upholding laws for the transient population than it is for kids’ welfare and creating a community for all.  One can not consider themselves to live in a community that cares when trash is everywhere, needles are on beaches, and laws are not upheld.

I will support and encourage you to support whatever it will take to clean this city up.  There are ways to be both empathetic and help persons who need help without allowing carte blanche destruction of people’s property (theft) and the environment.

I will continue to vote in every election until we get a city council willing to act.

Sincerely
Jennifer Smith
Sent from my iPhone

31.462 1.381
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Donna Karst <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 7:38 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Donna Karst

31.463 1.382
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Anne Murphy <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 7:45 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Anne Murphy
256 Moore St.

SC 95060
Virus-free. www.avg.com

31.464 1.383
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Russell Weisz <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 7:54 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Russell Weisz
319 Laguna St, Santa Cruz, CA 95060

31.465 1.384
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Franklin Harris <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 7:56 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members, I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses. I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff. Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance. Sincerely, Franklin J. Harris

31.466 1.385
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Debby J <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 7:58 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Deborah Joyce

31.467 1.386
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Antonio Losada <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 8:06 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members, I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses. I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff. Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance. Sincerely,

31.468 1.387
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: [email protected]
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 8:07 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Our Homeless Crisis and Oversized Vehicles
Council Members,
I feel deeply concerned about our homeless crisis and people living in tents or outdoors. As you know this results in tremendous problems: taking over public spaces (e.g., what used to be San Lorenzo Park and large sections of The San Lorenzo River and Pogonip), environmental damage, trash, fires, odor, drugs, alcohol, crime, graffiti, degradation of our community and a substantial drain on our tax dollars and public resources.

As one of the most expensive places to live in the U.S., Santa Cruz is a horrible place to try and become housed.

Many places are far more affordable than Santa Cruz -- and some have more jobs. Please do everything in your power to discourage homeless people from staying in Santa Cruz and to encourage them to go to places they might actually become housed.

Similarly, I'm concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and accompanying problems. I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and City staff. I support permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

To our credit, Santa Cruz already does more than our share to try and help homeless people. We have neither the desire nor the ability/resources to help more than our fair share of homeless people. We do no one any favors by pretending we can accommodate every housed or homeless person who might want to live here.

Sincerely,
Karsten Mueller

31.469 1.388
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Jackie <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 8:36 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses. I no longer feel safe walking our dog or kids down to Antonelli Pond or to USCS Coastal campus because of the intense 'camping' on Delaware and Swanton and Natural Bridges. It's been out of control for a while now.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Jackie Busse

31.470 1.389
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Matthew Sorensen <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 8:51 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Dear Council Members,
I am very concerned and saddened by the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I very much support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Thank you!
‐Matt

31.471 1.390
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Kathleen Ellenwood <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 9:03 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members, I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses. I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff. Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance. Sincerely,
David & Kathleen Ellenwood
--
Kathleen Power Ellenwood

31.472 1.391
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: John McCormick <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 9:13 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses. I live near the end of Delaware Avenue and have seen this problem progress over the years to become a blight to our community.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
John McCormick

31.473 1.392
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Karonfam <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 11:42 PM
To: City Council; Donna Meyers; Renee Golder; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Sonja Brunner; Justin Cummings; Sandy Brown; Martine Watkins
Subject: Support For Oversided Vehicle Ordinance With Edits Dear City Council, I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance if and only if enforcement of the ordinance is independent of the safe parking program and residential annual oversized parking permits are limited to one (1) per address and require current address documentation.

Respectfully,
Susan Karon
Sent from my box of chocolates
Not responsible for iErrors

31.474 1.393
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Christina Kobland <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 1:22 AM
To: City Council; Donna Meyers; Renee Golder; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Sonja Brunner; Justin Cummings; Sandy Brown; Martine Watkins
Subject: Support For Oversided Vehicle Ordinance With Edits Dear City Council, I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance if and only if enforcement of the ordinance is independent of the safe parking program and residential annual oversized parking permits are limited to one (1) per address and require current address documentation.

Sent from my iPhone

31.475 1.394
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: I <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 6:31 AM
To: City Council; Donna Meyers; Renee Golder; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Sonja Brunner; Justin Cummings; Sandy Brown; Martine Watkins
Subject: Support For Oversided Vehicle Ordinance With Edits Dear City Council,
I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance if and only if enforcement of the ordinance is independent of the safe parking program and residential annual oversized parking permits are limited to one (1) per address and require current address documentation.

Carol Wass

31.476 1.395
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bill Wass <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 6:31 AM
To: City Council; Donna Meyers; Renee Golder; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Sonja Brunner; Justin Cummings; Sandy Brown; Martine Watkins
Subject: Support For Oversided Vehicle Ordinance With Edits Dear City Council,
I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance if and only if enforcement of the ordinance is independent of the safe parking program and residential annual oversized parking permits are limited to one (1) per address and require current address documentation.

Bill

31.477 1.396
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: [email protected]
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 6:54 AM
To: City Council; Donna Meyers; Renee Golder; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Sonja Brunner; Justin Cummings; Sandy Brown; Martine Watkins
Subject: Support For Oversided Vehicle Ordinance With Edits Dear City Council,
I walk and own property on Natural Bridges and Delaware which are seriously impacted by large RVs camping on the street illegally and pose a serious safety and environmental threat.

I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance if and only if enforcement of the ordinance is independent of the safe parking program and residential annual oversized parking permits are limited to one (1) per address and require current address documentation.

Thank you in advance for support of this ordinance,
Carol Spragens

31.478 1.397
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: loretta ivison <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 7:37 AM
To: City Council; Donna Meyers; Renee Golder; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Sonja Brunner; Justin Cummings; Sandy Brown; Martine Watkins
Subject: Support For Oversided Vehicle Ordinance With Edits Dear City Council, I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance if and only if enforcement of the ordinance is independent of the safe parking program and residential annual oversized parking permits are limited to one (1) per address and require current address documentation.

Thank you
Loretta Ivison

31.479 1.398
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Johnathon Turner <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 7:57 AM
To: City Council; Donna Meyers; Renee Golder; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Sonja Brunner; Justin Cummings; Sandy Brown; Martine Watkins
Subject: Support For Oversided Vehicle Ordinance -- With Edits Dear City Council, I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance if and only if enforcement of the ordinance is independent of the safe parking program and residential annual oversized parking permits are limited to one (1) per address and require current address documentation.

We as a city need to get ahead of this issue because unsanctioned RV parking, along with associated safety, sewage, and trash problems, is only going to increase without some sort of true enforcement. Currently we are in the saddest state
ever as a city, and those of us who have lived here and loved this place are tired of broken down RV's wherever you look.

Come on Santa Cruz -- it's time to do something for your residents who play by the book.

Thank you

31.480 1.399
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Johnathon Turner <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 7:57 AM
To: City Council; Donna Meyers; Renee Golder; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Sonja Brunner; Justin Cummings; Sandy Brown; Martine Watkins
Subject: Support For Oversided Vehicle Ordinance -- With Edits Dear City Council, I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance if and only if enforcement of the ordinance is independent of the safe parking program and residential annual oversized parking permits are limited to one (1) per address and require current address documentation.

We as a city need to get ahead of this issue because unsanctioned RV parking, along with associated safety, sewage, and trash problems, is only going to increase without some sort of true enforcement. Currently we are in the saddest state
ever as a city, and those of us who have lived here and loved this place are tired of broken down RV's wherever you look.

Come on Santa Cruz -- it's time to do something for your residents who play by the book.

Thank you

31.481 1.400
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Margie Lafia <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 9:35 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
I want you to know that I support everything that is said in this email… Council Members, I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses. I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff. Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance. Sincerely,
--
Margie

31.482 1.401
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Robert Hatcher <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 9:56 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance throughout the city Free camping in Santa Cruz !!
No fees !
Dump waste in the bushes ,, it’s a wilderness ! The plants will love your ____ Extra trash and bike parts you don’t need ,mstuff ?‐ just leave it, the city has trash pick up And the beach is walking distance ! Seriously.

Best city on the coast
PS. If cops come knocking in the night ‐ be quiet, ignore them, they just go away.

Council Members,  I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.  I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.  Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance, and move them to official camp sites
Sincerely,
Tax payer Robert

31.483 1.402
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Tamera Smith <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 9:57 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am troubled by growing number of Oversized Vehicles. Their inhabitants cause environmental damage.

Generators and warming  fires have caused numerous small fires that can quickly get out of control with our current dry conditions. Evidence of increased crime, especially bicycle chop shops,  is apparent in our neighborhoods and at local businesses struggling to stay afloat.

I support and commend you on your efforts to advance the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance being considered by the Council and city staff. Santa Cruz needs more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely, Tamera Smith
Sent from my iPhone

31.484 1.403
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Marc Schwartz <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 10:20 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Oversize Vehicle ordinance
Dear City Council,
Marc Schwartz here. I am a longtime Santa Cruz resident, homeowner and voter. My address is 419 Woodland Way, Santa Cruz, 95060.

Please pass an oversize vehicle ordinance ASAP! I often hike the trails of Natural Bridges State Beach and I have seen first hand the environmental degradation that the illegal campers in their oversize vehicles cause.

Good governance requires that this problem be addressed. I urge you to give this matter it's due attention.

Sincerely,
Marc S. Schwartz
Attorney at Law (Partially retired)

31.485 1.404
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: DONALD E CAPONIGRO <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 10:22 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Sent from my iPad

31.486 1.405
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Mike Kolar <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 10:51 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Oversized vehicles
I support the oversized vehicle ordnance and strongly agree that these vehicles need to have permits to be lawfully in our neighborhoods and city limits. Please consider the safety of our community and help keep the environment clean of discarded sewage and trash which accumulates from most of these oversized vehicles.

Thank you for your consideration, Michael Kolar 511 Centennial street Santa Cruz CA

31.487 1.406
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Diane Sipkin <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 11:44 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Support for the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am very concerned about the large number of oversized vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste, and increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Diane Sipkin
Westside Santa Cruz

31.488 1.407
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Yonat Michaelov <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 12:01 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
Every single day near my home on Almar there are RVs parking, and the street smells like urinals, garbage is strewn everywhere near West Cliff, there are some Vans frankly ,that seem to live there for the last year. maybe they could pay some property taxes too...

I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Yonat Michaelov

31.489 1.408
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: tiachristianson <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 12:31 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Re: the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Dear Council Members,
I am a homeowner on the West Side....not far from where numerous RVs are parked. In the past 3 months we have had our car broken into (radio stolen), and had a second car stolen (eventually recovered with the catalytic converter removed). This is apart from the small thefts of bikes, tools and equipment. Every morning homeowners who have Ring security cameras get updates about another theft in our area.

In addition to the crime, there is trash and waste all around these RVs. You just need to walk through the area around Swift street or start driving towards Davenport to see what I'm talking about.

I strongly support a ban on Oversized Vehicles - this is a way to make our streets (and homes) safer.

Please consider those of us who own homes, pay property taxes and generally are the most invested in the health and success of our community ....we deserve to have a voice in these decisions as much as anyone else, and deserve to be able to live in our homes without continually being subjected to theft.

Sincerely,
Tia Christianson

31.490 1.409
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: [email protected]
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 12:51 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,<BR><BR>I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.  <BR><BR>I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.<BR><BR>Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.<BR><BR>Sincerely,<BR><BR> Matt Cohen

31.491 1.410
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: glen m hanson <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 1:26 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance. Iam tired of people using drugs and defacating in front of my house that I have been paying taxes on for the last 30 years Sincerely,
Mark kuchler

31.492 1.411
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Dan Sullivan <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 1:37 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

I also support the creation of an RV park at the edge of City limits where these units could congregate. This would include sanitary provisions that are standard in these parks and there would be a nightly fee to use them.

Sincerely,
Dan and Jean Sullivan
115 Baymount St
Santa Cruz

31.493 1.412
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Eberhardt Jeanine <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 3:08 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council members, thank you for your efforts to maintain our city's beauty, health, and environment. As a fourteen year resident of West Side, Santa Cruz, I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses. I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff. Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance. Kind regards, Jeanine and Paul Eberhardt

31.494 1.413
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Jennifer Greene <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 5:20 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Vehicles are movable. They do not have to stay in Santa Cruz. If this ordinance is passed it will perhaps provide an incentive to stem the growing tide of people who move to Santa Cruz without the means to stay or meaningfully contribute to our town. A transient population may move in, stay a while, then move on. I support that. I also support giving police the tools they need to enforce the law.

Sincerely, Jennifer Greene

31.495 1.414
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Chelsea Mele <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 7:06 AM
To: City Council
Subject: It is ok to say enough.

Times have changed and so do people's opinions.

And now it is ok to say enough is enough. People are tired of supporting the cost of people who have not used enough forsite to take care of themselves. And it is preferred that the council move to make car camping and RV parking more expensive so as to make it a thing of the past.

31.496 1.415
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Laura LaForce <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 7:39 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Dear City Council Members
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.  I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.  Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

I work and live on the Westside and I walk from my house along Natural Bridges/Shaffer Road and I am not comfortable walking by myself. I think that putting in place the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance will help both the residents that live here and the folks who are needing a safe place to sleep.

Sincerely,
Laura Jones
Sent from my iPhone

31.497 1.416
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Claire Castagna <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 7:34 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Yes please ban RV parking overnight
Dear City Council,
Please clean up the streets of our city by making a reasonable ban on overnight RV parking. There are too many people taking advantage of the compassion this city shows to the unhoused  community and deciding they’d like to live for free right here. There are too many people in RVs who have abused our leniency. It’s not right.

Our City requires sanitation services and housing codes in order for citizens to live together well.  I have to have the plumbing in my house up to code. I have to pay for water and trash. I have to keep my property clear of debris. And I’d like to live in a clean environment that is respected by others. A few people should not have the right to trash the streets just because they want to.

Please put the overnight ban in place. That’s why we elected you! Sincerely,
Claire Castagna
Robert Hatcher
139 Peyton St
Santa Cruz

31.498 1.417
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: [email protected]
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 7:44 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Support of Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Dear Council Members;
I am frustrated by number of Oversized Vehicles and the environmental damage to our neighborhoods.

Please vote in favor of the Ordinance this Tuesday.

Thank you.

Rob DiNapoli
Live Oak District
Sent from my iPhone

31.499 1.418
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Patrick Mcdonald <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 7:45 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.  I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff. Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Patrick McDonald
Sent from my iPhone

31.500 1.419
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Andrea Struble’s <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 7:47 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinances
Council Members,I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.<BR><BR>Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely
Andrea Struble
Sent from my iPhone

31.501 1.420
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Julie Kimball <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 8:04 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members, I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses. I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff. Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Julie Kimball

31.502 1.421
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Gregg Brooks <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 6:33 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members, I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses. I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff. Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance. Sincerely,
It has really gotten out of hand in the circles!
Gregory Brooks
331 Dufour St
Santa Cruz

31.503 1.422
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: C.J. Hertzer <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 7:32 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets. I am frustrated at finding more items large and small dumped on my block than in the past.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff. Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for designated safe temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces. People must have bathrooms or a place to safely dispose of human waste. SCPD must be empowered to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Cynthia Hertzer
124 Naglee Avenue

31.504 1.423
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: David Giannini <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 8:28 AM
To: City Council; Donna Meyers; Renee Golder; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Sonja Brunner; Justin Cummings; Sandy Brown; Martine Watkins
Subject: Support For Oversided Vehicle Ordinance
Dear City Council,
I am writing to you this morning to support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance.

I often ride my bicycle on Swanton, Delaware, Natural Bridges and Mission. Dodging trash is a regular event and I have been accosted several times. It's a mess.

It would be especially effective if enforcement of the ordinance were independent of the safe parking program and residential if annual oversized parking permits are limited to one (1) per address and require current address documentation.

Yours in confidence something will be done,
David Giannini

31.505 1.424
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Steve McCarty <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 8:58 AM
To: City Council; Donna Meyers; Renee Golder; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Sonja Brunner; Justin Cummings; Sandy Brown; Martine Watkins
Subject: Support For Oversided Vehicle Ordinance Item 25 Dear City Council,
I am writing in support of the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance on the agenda today, and the establishment of safe spaces parking.

Yours,
Steve McCarty

31.506 1.425
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Ellen Sevy <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 8:37 AM
To: City Council; Donna Meyers; Renee Golder; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Sonja Brunner; Justin Cummings; Sandy Brown; Martine Watkins
Subject: Support For Oversided Vehicle Ordinance With Edits Dear City Council,
It is hard for me to believe how many times I have written this same letter over numerous  past years I was cleaning out my email and I am finding letters to you about this issue datting back to 2015. My guess is I would find more but that was the year my computer had a stroke and I lost a lot.

I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance if and only if enforcement of the ordinance is independent of the safe parking program and residential annual oversized parking permits are limited to one (1) per address and require current address documentation.  Without enforcing the rules you will be wasting any money spent At this point I will take any ordinance that improves the lives, health, and safety of the hard working tax paying citizens of Santa Cruz. FYI many of us are not rich and we are barely holding on. and cant take this way of living anymore.

Santa Cruz needs to deal with all the vehicles on the streets they are gross polluting vehicles. Even the fancy ones.  They also have many other vehicles associated with them.  Yes they might be homes but camping in them parked on the street is unacceptable. Direct the police to enforce the laws on the books. Faith based parking is one solution but the county building is a place that could also be used and policed and cleaned daily.

It would help get the county more involved.

Maybe your front yard might be a possibility but I am sick of it being my front yard.

I dont think it needs to have the high price tag I read about. People in campers need to pay for a spot or do work/ clean up in exchange. Stop giving everything away for free. If you offer the space then you can certainly enforce the parking rules.

How can one man deal with all the calls all over town ( Joe Hebe) I am so tired of the game of waka mole.

Drugs are the biggest problem. The only way to help a drug addicted person is get them off drugs.

I also support getting this ordinance into place so  the people who are not from here might leave. That would be a way to  start to self police.

I also support the idea of not having trailers on the back of trucks or not connected at all parked on the street.

They can go for 30 plus feet and I cant get in and of my door. It isn’t safe.

I am not cold hearted, I am just burnt out after more than 3 plus decades of seeing the  same problems worsen.

Thank you
Ellen

31.507 1.426
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Peter Cook <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 9:05 AM
To: City Council; Donna Meyers; Renee Golder; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Sonja Brunner; Justin Cummings; Sandy Brown; Martine Watkins
Subject: Please Support the RV Ordinance With Edits
Dear Mayor and City Council,
Thank you for bringing this ordinance forward, it is long over due.

I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance if and only if enforcement of the ordinance is independent of the safe parking program and residential annual oversized parking permits are limited to one (1) per address and require current address documentation.

Also please give SCPD specific instructions to enforce this ordinance in it’s entirety.

Sincerely,
Peter Cook
Sent from my iPhone

31.508 1.427
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Sergio Camerlo <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 9:29 AM
To: City Council; Donna Meyers; Renee Golder; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Sonja Brunner; Justin Cummings; Sandy Brown; Martine Watkins
Subject: Support For Oversided Vehicle Ordinance With Edits Dear City Council, I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance if and only if enforcement of the ordinance is independent of the safe parking program and residential annual oversized parking permits are limited to one (1) per address and require current address documentation.

Respectfully,
Sergio Camerlo, resident
Sent from my iPhone

31.509 1.428
2 45 years on Santa Cruz westside

31.510 1.429
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Marita <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 9:57 AM
To: City Council; Donna Meyers; Renee Golder; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Sonja Brunner; Justin Cummings; Sandy Brown; Martine Watkins
Subject: Support For Oversided Vehicle Ordinance With Edits Dear City Council,   With all the OVC parked on Mission Street ext, Swanton blvd and Delaware I have seen more and more trash left in the bushes and street gutters. I am not walking with my large dog in any of these areas due to garbage, stinky motor homes and confronted with hostile comments.  The self made camping area (mission st, hwy1, swift st ) is also a filthy, fire hazard area.  This is an ongoing problem that needs a group of ppl, with proven experience of helping this problem.

I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance if and only if enforcement of the ordinance is independent of the safe parking program and residential annual oversized parking permits are limited to one (1) per address and require current address documentation.

Marita's
iPhone

31.511 1.430
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Garrett <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 10:40 AM
To: City Council; Donna Meyers; Renee Golder; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Sonja Brunner; Justin Cummings; Sandy Brown; Martine Watkins
Subject: Support For Oversided Vehicle Ordinance With Edits Dear City Council,
I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance if and only if enforcement of the ordinance is independent of the safe parking program and residential annual oversized parking permits are limited to one (1) per address and require current address documentation.

Let's get real. There was one RV parked for almost FOUR YEARS at Garfield Park along with an assortment of other campers. They moved every 72 hours to park on other side streets for one night, then moved back. The city removed most of the trash cans because I assume they were getting stuffed overly full by campers. For the most part, that vehicle stayed overnight in spite of no parking 12-5 signs, and despite calls to parking, until FINALLY I think someone came out to write a ticket, then they moved, so far so good there. Sure that vehicle is still squatting on other city streets somewhere, but this ordinance says "You need to figure out something else. Your life has no plan. You take but do not reciprocate." I hope there will be a way for parking to data track complains and their actions to enforce this ordinance.

Garrett Philipp - Westside

31.512 1.431
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Peter Scontriano <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 8:39 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members, I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses. I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff. Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance. Sincerely,

31.513 1.432
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Dan - <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 8:56 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Support for the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
Thank you for addressing this very important issue affecting the City of Santa Cruz.

I work on Delaware Ave and know first hand the damage to our neighborhoods and businesses resulting from the dozens of RVs parked there daily.

I very much appreciate your efforts to curtail non-residents from camping on our city streets. The use of temporary permits along with diligent SCPD enforcement seems a good step in the right direction. Please feel free to reach out to me if you need any assistance.

Sincerely,
Dan Coughlin

31.514 1.433
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Tommy Ligon <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 8:33 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Tommy Ligon

31.515 1.434
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: myra ritchey <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 8:44 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

The growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Myra Ritchey

31.516 1.435
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Kim Mygatt <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 8:51 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,<BR><BR>I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.  <BR><BR>I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.<BR><BR>Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.<BR><BR>Sincerely,<BR><BR> Sent from my iPhone

31.517 1.436
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Jugdeep Aggarwal <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 8:55 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Jugdeep Aggarwal

31.518 1.437
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: David of Santa Cruz <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 9:05 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

They are making the city unlivable and siphoning funds from our budget, that could be used to make worthwhile public improvements.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively and quickly enforce this ordinance.

Forget that you work on behalf of the taxpayers who fund Santa Cruz at your own peril....a la Glover and Krohn.

Sincerely,
David Daggett
Santa Cruz CA.

31.519 1.438
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: duppano <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 9:10 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Charles Duppen-Ottaviano

31.520 1.439
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Eve Ortiz <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 9:11 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members, I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses. I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff. Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance. Sincerely,

31.521 1.440
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Laura Livingston <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 9:14 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Overnight Parking
Council Members,
I have been concerned for years about the number of vehicles parked illegally on our streets and the accompanying environmental damage and increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance and look forward to seeing results from your actions.

Sincerely,
Laura Livingston
Westside Resident

31.522 1.441
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Jim Cardosa <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 9:30 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members, I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses. I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff. Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

As a homeowner who lives adjacent to the CVS parking lot on Mission Street, I'm well aware of the problems inherent in the lack of laws regarding these vehicles. Several of them park in the CVS parking lot overnight once the store has closed and CVS and the owner of the lot do nothing to dissuade this. The resulting problems are loud music blaring at night, generators running at all hours and discarded trash and drug paraphernalia which has also led to an increase in the rodent population. At the very least, this is a health issue for the neighboring community.

Please consider this ordinance including a provision holding commercial property owners liable for policing and securing their empty parking lots during off hours so that they don't become RV havens by night.

Sincerely,
Jim Cardosa

31.523 1.442
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Debra Wallace <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 9:34 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Debra Wallace

31.524 1.443
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Dan Verinsky <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 9:38 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
Having lived on the Westside of SC for over 30 years, I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Dan Verinsky

31.525 1.444
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Debbie Hancock <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 9:45 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members, I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.  I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.  Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

While walking my dog, we are often forced to walk in the street because many RVs pile their stuff on the sidewalk.  It is impossible to walk around the trash.  We are forced to walk on the street.  With cars passing, walking on the street is not safe, but that is what we are forced to do.

In addition, because it is not unusual for unleashed dogs to suddenly appear from the RVs, I now cross to the other side of the street.  These unleashed dogs have not only nipped at my heals, but also growled and showed their teeth at my dog.  I am afraid their dog will attack my dog.  Owners often are no where to be seen.  I now am forced to carry pepper spray to protect us.

Bottom line, since I do not know what to expect as we come upon an RV, I avoid them at all cost.  This atmosphere makes for stressful walks.  Hopefully this new ordinance with make walking the city streets a pleasure, in addition to correcting the other issues created by RV parking.

Thank you
Sincerely,
Debbie K Hancock
Sent from my iPad

31.526 1.445
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Rebecca Meehan <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 9:50 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Thank you for your attention to this issue.

Sincerely,
Rebecca Meehan

31.527 1.446
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Terri Richards <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 9:57 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members, I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.  I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff. Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Also, I would like to see land set aside for these vans/cars and rvs with bathrooms/showers, laundry and bus service with the millions of dollars that we now throw at the homeless. This would give a safe clean space for them and keep them in off the streets.

31.528 1.447
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: lorina fleming <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 10:05 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Dear council members,
This is extremely important in a city that has tourism.  Council Members,<BR><BR>I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.  <BR><BR>I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.<BR><BR>Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.<BR><BR>Sincerely,<BR><BR>
Sent from my iPad

31.529 1.448
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Matthew Radovan <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 10:12 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

These vehicles represent a health and safety risk to the community. The law requires vehicles to be registered and maintained to keep everyone safe. Most are leaking oil which runs directly to the ocean, leaking sewage, have bald tires that are unsafe for driving at any speed, and are gross polluters, Additionally the owners of these vehicles often are running gas powered generators in areas adjacent to grasslands that are high fire risk.

Parking and living on the streets is bad for everyone, not just the unhoused. They need to have an appropriate place to park and they need to contribute financially to support that home. The citizens of Santa Cruz pay taxes to have a clean and safe city. This can not continue. It is destroying the city and local economy.

Sincerely,
Matt Radovan
Westside Resident

31.530 1.449
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Joan Timpany <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 10:38 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Joan Timpany
Santa Cruz, CA 95062

31.531 1.450
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: jennifer farley <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 10:39 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Hello Council Members,
I live in the Seabright area and have seen an increase of human waste, all day parking of large vans and campers, and used needles and trash at the River mouth lookout.

I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets.

There has been an and increased theft and vandalism in our neighborhoods and businesses. I have three neighbors and myself who have had there car burglarized.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles and oversized vans that are clearly being used to sleep in, on city streets and in public spaces.

Also, please provide the provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Jennifer Farley
108 Seaview Ave
Santa Cruz 95062

31.532 1.451
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Mark O'Neill <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 10:46 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Dear Santa Cruz City Council Members,
I am a westside resident and homeowner who is concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.  On our street near the intersection of West Cliff we have several vehicles parking overnight on a regular basis.  A similar situation exists on our neighboring streets.  Since there are no restroom facilities nearby, our beautiful coastline is being used as one by many of these people.  It is a very sad situation.  I also observe that some of these RVs and campers move into the parking lots on West Cliff in the morning and stay there all day limiting the availability of parking for other people.  I often see them using alcohol and drugs making it an uncomfortable place for others, especially children and tourists.

I appreciate and support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.  I would also like to see the SCPD enforce pollution laws being violated by those who are polluting our coastline.

Sincerely,
Mark O’Neill

31.533 1.452
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Emma Ledvina <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 11:05 AM
To: City Council
Cc: Martine Watkins; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Renee Golder; Donna Meyers; Justin Cummings; Sandy Brown; Sonja Brunner; Lee Butler; Andrew Mills; Larry Imwalle Subject: Vote NO on Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Dear Council,
The proposed Oversized Vehicles Ordinance (OVO) is unresearched, counterproductive, and unacceptable.

At the September 21, 2021 council meeting, we learned that the goal of OVO is to give police enhanced tools to “move vehicles along”. According to the City Attorney, enforcing current environmental and nuisance laws is ineffectual. He said, “just writing a citation, even if it’s a misdemeanor, even if you could arrest someone and take them into custody, the way the court process works these days, they would be right back out on the street within an hour and go back to a parked RV and continue to engage in the conduct we’re trying to address”. It seems that instead of acknowledging that ticketing, towing, and writing misdemeanors are not an effective way of managing homelessness (as supported by decades of research), the city will double down and create a new tool to incarcerate people who cannot afford to comply with the OVO, all while not significantly providing resources that would help people to avoid engaging in so‐called “nuisance behaviors”. Many of these “nuisance behaviors” are acts of survival by our marginalized neighbors who have been abandoned by the city. The repeated reference to the need to address health and safety concerns, without acknowledging that the health and safety of people sleeping in vehicles for survival is severely impacted by removing their shelter is disgusting and clearly in opposition with Health In All Policies.

The proposed solution, as outlined by Mills, is that OVO will allow the city to cite misdemeanor infractions, take an individual into custody, have the city attorney prosecute the individual, levy fines on a person living in poverty, and then tow their vehicle when they are unable to comply. Additionally, Andy Mills disclosed that towing is incredibly resource intensive and expensive and that the city has had to create a brand new tow‐yard in order to accommodate the RVs and vehicles seized during “Operation Westside Story”. Even more money and resources will be spent fighting lawsuits that challenge the constitutionality of OVO and appealing to the coastal commission, who called the last version of ordinance “onerous,” “drastic” and “draconian” I am outraged that city resources will be used to create more unsheltered homelessness and deepen cycles of poverty. Those very same city resources should be used for productive solutions that use city property for safe sleeping programs, help vehicles get registered, provide free sanitary methods for grey water disposal, and provide more refuse services (all services that would be of benefit to all community members).

The bottom line is people have nowhere else to go. It is not enough to include vague mention of safe sleeping programs while prioritizing criminalization of our most vulnerable neighbors. The Affiliated Faith Community (AFC) has been operating its SafeSpaces Parking Program for years and it is currently the ONLY resource being offered when police force people to move their vehicles under threat of ticketing and misdemeanors. They are required by law to provide a safe place to sleep when they displace someone from their survival shelter; however, as program director, Reverend Joseph Jacobs, shared at the city council meeting a month ago:

Despite this reliance on referral to AFC (who operates 41 overnight parking spaces), the city has *never* funded their services and, recently, even refused to financially support expansion. Instead, these programs

31.534 1.453
2 have been mentioned only as an afterthought, despite being proven to provide stability and bolster the ability to transition to housing, in addition to offering a more dignified survival option to being unsheltered. The city continues to be disingenuous about their support of existing programs and there are simply not enough alternative shelters and housing available.

We need action that prioritizes listening to and coordinating with experts: our houseless community, community advocates and service providers, researchers who study houselessness, and the County Health and Human Service Departments.

We demand services without the threat of criminalization! Do not allow OVO to become policy! Thank you,
Emma Ledvina
Sent from my iPhone

31.535 1.454
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Erin Wood <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 11:52 AM
To: City Council
Cc: Martine Watkins; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Renee Golder; Donna Meyers; Justin Cummings; Sandy Brown; Sonja Brunner; Lee Butler; Andrew Mills; Larry Imwalle Subject: Vote NO on Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Dear Council,
The proposed Oversized Vehicles Ordinance (OVO) is inhumane. It doesn't make any sense for a policy to be put in place that keeps folks moving around like this, in danger of being ticketed or towed. It is like pouring salt in a wound of someone already struggling. Not to mention the money it takes to run a program like this, and the money to have cops ticketing them and processing the paperwork, etc. From what I understand from the proposal is that it would only allow for something like 12 days of legal parking a month anyways. It is a lose-lose situation.

I just think so much more of our creativity and energy could go into actually finding solutions to get folks housed safely, instead of continuing to shuffle them around. Imagine how you would feel if you were constantly having to find safe places to park, with no physical address to register a permit and no extra funds to pay for one. What if this were you or a loved one? I am continuously baffled by the lack of compassion and care I see all around us.

What we need are more services without the threat of criminalization! Do not allow OVO to become policy!
Thank you,
Erin Wood, L.Ac.

Showing Up for Racial Justice, Santa Cruz County
“Love isn't about what we did yesterday; it's about what we do today and tomorrow and the day after”
~Grace Lee Boggs
Erin Lise Wood (she/her)
www.erinwoodacupuncture.com
On the traditional homelands of the Amah Mutsun Tribal Band

31.536 1.455
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Meghan Radford <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 11:54 AM
To: Erin Wood
Cc: Donna Meyers; Sandy Brown; Andrew Mills; City Council; Justin Cummings; Lee Butler; Larry Imwalle; Martine Watkins; Renee Golder; Sonja Brunner; Shebreh KalantariJohnson Subject: Re: Vote NO on Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Beautiful thank you so much!!!🙏
On Sun, Oct 24, 2021 at 11:52 AM Erin Wood <[email protected]> wrote:

Dear Council,
The proposed Oversized Vehicles Ordinance (OVO) is inhumane. It doesn't make any sense for a policy to be put in place that keeps folks moving around like this, in danger of being ticketed or towed. It is like pouring salt in a wound of someone already struggling. Not to mention the money it takes to run a program like this, and the money to have cops ticketing them and processing the paperwork, etc. From what I understand from the proposal is that it would only allow for something like 12 days of legal parking a month anyways. It is a lose-lose situation.

I just think so much more of our creativity and energy could go into actually finding solutions to get folks housed safely, instead of continuing to shuffle them around. Imagine how you would feel if you were constantly having to find safe places to park, with no physical address to register a permit and no extra funds to pay for one. What if this were you or a loved one? I am continuously baffled by the lack of compassion and care I see all around us.

What we need are more services without the threat of criminalization! Do not allow OVO to become policy!
Thank you,
Erin Wood, L.Ac.

Showing Up for Racial Justice, Santa Cruz County
“Love isn't about what we did yesterday; it's about what we do today and tomorrow and the day after”
~Grace Lee Boggs
Erin Lise Wood (she/her)
www.erinwoodacupuncture.com
On the traditional homelands of the Amah Mutsun Tribal Band --
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Core Team" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to

31.537 1.456
2 [email protected].

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/coreteamsurjscc/CAMc8LKJO- %3Dpzd%2BYQgwHndAJne%2BH1tn9GoWXt_80THhV%3DdRx1rg%40mail.gmail.com.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

31.538 1.457
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Al Ramadan <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 12:37 PM
To: City Council; Donna Meyers; Renee Golder; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Sonja Brunner; Justin Cummings; Sandy Brown; Martine Watkins
Subject: Support For Oversided Vehicle Ordinance With Edits Dear City Council, I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance if and only if enforcement of the ordinance is independent of the safe parking program and residential annual oversized parking permits are limited to one (1) per address and require current address documentation. Thank you. Al

31.539 1.458
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Tonni Kuchler <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 1:13 PM
To: City Council; Donna Meyers; Renee Golder; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Sonja Brunner; Justin Cummings; Sandy Brown; Martine Watkins
Subject: Support For Oversided Vehicle Ordinance With Edits Dear City Council, I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance if and only if enforcement of the ordinance is independent of the safe parking program and residential annual oversized parking permits are limited to one (1) per address and require current address documentation.

31.540 1.459
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Gene Manako <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 1:32 PM
To: City Council; Donna Meyers; Renee Golder; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Sonja Brunner; Justin Cummings; Sandy Brown; Martine Watkins
Subject: Support For Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Dear City Council -
As a longtime Westside Santa Cruz resident, father and homeowner, I have serious concerns about the transient RV population on the Westside of town. As such, I enthusiastically support the proposed Oversized Vehicle Ordinance.

The RV situation on Delaware Ave., Shaffer Rd. and Mission St. extension is an environmental disaster. There are several "Breaking Bad" style RVs with garbage strewn all around them. And you're being ridiculously naive if you think any of those vehicles are properly disposing their black water (i.e. - human excrement and dirty water).

There's also a been a significant increase in property crime in those same areas as well as stories of drug trafficking out of several of those dilapidated RVs.

Please enact some policies to curtail this growing problem.

Sincerely,
Gene Manako

31.541 1.460
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Feney Matthews <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 2:23 PM
To: City Council; Donna Meyers; Justin Cummings; Martine Watkins; Renee Golder; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Sandy Brown; Sonja Brunner
Subject: Support For Oversided Vehicle Ordinance With Edits Dear City Council, I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance if and only if enforcement of the ordinance is independent of the safe parking program and residential annual oversized parking permits are limited to one (1) per address and require current address documentation.

Kathleen matthews
2395 delaware ave #11
Santa Cruz 95060

31.542 1.461
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Paul Rosenberg <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 10:55 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,<BR><BR>
Please consider the oversize parking control ordinance favorably. I’m not opposed to helping the homeless but turning the west side into a junkyard is not the way.

Regards, Paul Rosenberg
249 Getchell St
Sent from my iPhone

31.543 1.462
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Andy Hartmann <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 10:56 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the number of oversized vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of oversized vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce.

Sincerely,
Andy Hartmann

31.544 1.463
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Brent Elder <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 11:10 AM
To: City Council
Cc: Anne Elder
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles (a mix of RVs, large trailers, and camper trucks) being used for semi-permanent housing on our streets in the westside, where my family lives. On my daily walks and drives through the area, I have been passing by the same vehicles every day, and have witnessed (and smelled for days afterward) at least 3 sewage dumps from these RVs into the street, one grass fire, huge amounts of trash being dumped, and nearby parks being used as bathrooms every day. At night, many of these vehicles are running polluting, noisy generators for hours. They are occupying a large amount of parking space on Natural Bridges, Delaware, and Shaffer drives. Some of the owners of these vehicles are parking an RV, and associated smaller motor vehicles or trailers alongside it.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff. Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Brent Elder
121 San Jose Ave
Santa Cruz, CA

31.545 1.464
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Patrick Mcdonald <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 11:13 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Please pass the RV ordinance
Folks,
Please provide safe parking for the working poor and enact policies that discourage the lawlessness that has become rampant in our city. By the non-enforcement and appeasement direction we have turned over a lot of this town to the addicts, transients and thieves.

The current policies have conceded the river and have a catastrophe in the making with the rains coming. Your policies enable and entice folks to come live their lawless lifestyle by having no repercussions for selling drugs, stealing and the myriad of other crimes that come with addiction. Your policies are at best an enabler and at worst complicit in the deaths that occur. Enabling and providing services at every step does nothing to help these folks. Addicts,if able to help themselves, have to hit bottom. The city allows addicts to never hit bottom and does nothing to stop the cycle. In fact ,I'd argue your policies attract folks from all over thereby making it worse every week.

You have a chance to set a new direction by imposing the RV ordinance. Provide for the working poor with safe parking lots and make it known that Santa Cruz is no longer a place to come live your lawless lifestyle by the beach.

Thank you,
Pat McDonald

31.546 1.465
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: S & B Barisof <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 11:13 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Dear Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Steven Barisof

31.547 1.466
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Dell Elliott <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 11:19 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,

31.548 1.467
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: [email protected]
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 11:19 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
David Plumlee

31.549 1.468
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bryn Fenton <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 11:40 AM
To: City Council
Subject: We support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
We are very concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

Our Westside neighborhood supports your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff. Delaware and Natural Bridges are a complete disgrace.

Specifically, strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively ENFORCE this ordinance in areas with no overnight parking signs.

Sincerely,
Bryn Fenton

31.550 1.469
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Anne <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 11:42 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Just like Natural Bridges Drive and Delaware Avenue, it has become so bad on West Cliff Drive, particularly at Stockton Avenue, that many walkers have to cross the street instead of passing in front of the vehicles. There’s illegal activity and intimidation happening. Allowing people to live in their cars, vans and RVs on West Cliff has actually reduced access to the coast for many people who are afraid to pass by the vehicles on the coast side.

These license plates are from California, out of town and out of state. Please help us by dedicating parking places for the vehicles in city and/or religious parking lots with restroom and garbage facilities. The coast is for everyone.

Sincerely,
Anne
Sent from my iPad

31.551 1.470
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Richard Schuppek <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 12:00 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Hello Council Members,
I am very concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles, safety of my children, the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses. I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff. Specifically. I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely, concerned resident and Westside home owner.

Richard Schuppek
301 Alta Avenue
Santa Cruz, CA 95060

31.552 1.471
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Dan Moran <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 12:22 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Please help us
Safe parking is a great idea it will also help in curbing all the trash being left around town.

Dan Moran
Sent from my iPhone

31.553 1.472
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Alison Allami <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 12:37 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members, I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses. I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff. Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Alison Al-Lami

31.554 1.473
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Steve Pleich <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 12:44 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Agenda Item 25
Proposal for Development
Of Safe Parking Program in
the City of Santa Cruz
October 25, 2021
Agency Name: Homeless Persons Legal Assistance Project
Program Name: Safe Parking Program
Street Address: 1105 Delaware Avenue
Contact Person: Steve Pleich
Telephone Number: 831-466-6078
Email Address: [email protected]
Project Narrative
Safe, even temporary, shelter is one of the most pressing needs in our community. As illustrated by every recent bi-annual Homeless Census and Survey, one of the fastest growing demographics among unsheltered residents is the vehicularly housed. The safe parking program as proposed would relieve recreational vehicle traffic and congestion that has negatively impacted our neighborhoods county wide while providing safe, secure areas for vehicularly housed people on a consistent, nightly basis. As more fully detailed herein, the safe parking program does not envision permanent occupancy as this would create legal tenancies that are neither desirable nor necessary for the successful operation of the program.

Assessing the Need
Homeless surveys reveal that almost 80% of the nearly 2,200 people experiencing homelessness in Santa Cruz County are without shelter of any kind every night.

Of those, approximately 20% of all unsheltered people reside in recreational vehicles, vans or automobiles.

31.555 1.474
2 It is estimated that in our city there are more than 200 recreational vehicles, vans and cars that serve as the primary home for individuals and/or families. Many families see this option as the only way to keep the family unit together in the absence of affordable housing. Most of these vehicles are forced by circumstances to park overnight on the street in violation of local ordinances.

Program Design
Subsection A:

1. This program proposes that the City of Santa Cruz designate a parcel of currently unused public property for the purpose of establishing one or more Safe Parking Program. Alternatively, private commercial property would be considered but would increase the proposed budget.

2. Each site would accommodate no less than 10 but no more than 15 recreational vehicles. This number of units would project to serving 25-40 homeless individuals of all ages at each site.

3. Multiple sites could shelter as much as 50% of the total vehicle dwellers.

4. Overnight parking would be from 6:00pm to 6:00am without exception.

5. Registration for overnight stay would begin at 5:00pm and end at 5:45.

6. Staff personnel would then review the overnight roster and set the night’s security procedures.

7. Under the proposal, paid non-profit staff would manage the site.

8. Garbage service and portable toilets would be provided by the program.

9. Perimeter fencing would be erected to define the boundaries of the site and provide additional security. City Public Works would be consulted as to the requirements of such installation.

10. A secure entrance would be created and staffed by the Program Coordinator plus one additional security monitor. Program personnel would be on site one hour before registration until one hour after all overnight guests have exited the site.

31.556 1.475
3 11. A general liability insurance policy would be provided to indemnify and hold harmless the city or county for any loss, harm or injury suffered by it or any overnight guest.

Subsection B:

As stated hereinabove, our bi-annual homeless census clearly identifies the vehicularly housed as a significant percentage of the overall homeless population. Just as relevantly, it further identifies that group as one of the fastest growing.

As to eligibility requirements, all program participants must meet the following criteria:
(1) maximum occupancy for any applicant’s vehicle must not exceed two adults, or two adult parents, with one or two minor children; (2) the vehicle’s owner (or one of them) must possess a valid California Operator’s Permit; (3) the vehicle’s ownership must be properly, currently registered in the name of the occupant (or one of them); (4) each vehicle must be fully self-contained, i.e., must have functional waste-collection and waste water containment systems, with fully operational on-board heating and cooking systems, and a self-contained fresh water system; and (6) each vehicle, and its surroundings, must be maintained in reasonably presentable condition.

Additionally, each participant must be registered with the Homeless Management Information System (HMIS) and be agreeable to participate in coordinated entry programs as well as benefits, housing, medical and mental health counseling options provide by the County of Santa Cruz, which is envisioned by the program creator to be a full partner in the proposed program.

Organizational Experience and Capacity:

In 2016, Steve Pleich incorporated the Homeless Persons Legal Assistance Project. This entity is duly registered as a California public benefit corporation and enjoys tax exempt status through its fiscal sponsor the United Nations Association of Santa Cruz County, a registered 501©3. We are, therefore, legally able to serve as a contracting agency for program operational and liability purposes. Our original and ongoing mission is to provide legal assistance for people experiencing homelessness in Santa Cruz County. However, we now intend to expand our mission to encompass the development of programs designed to provide safe, secure and legal parking areas within the City of Santa Cruz.

As drafter of this proposal, my experience with the issue of safe recreational vehicle parking began about six (6) years ago when I was asked to draft an RV Guest Parking Program for the Association of Faith Communities of Santa Cruz County of which I was a founding member and remain a member of its Leadership Council. The creation of that program led directly to the creation of the Safe Spaces RV Parking Program.

I am a former RV dweller of longstanding and know the community of people who reside in their vehicles. I believe that experience, gleaned from both RV living and continued

31.557 1.476
4 association, uniquely qualify me to not only create but administer the program proposed herein.

With respect to other relevant qualifications, I created the model pilot emergency shelter program for the Veterans Memorial Building as well as the operating budget for that program. As principle draftsperson, I participated in several meetings with both city and county officials.

Program Budget:

Total yearly budget would be approximately $40,000.00.

Program Personnel would include one (1) on site Program Coordinator and one (1) Security Monitor at $1,000.00 per month each.

Cost of permanent or semi-permanent perimeter fencing is unknown but projected at $2,000.00.

Cost of garbage service and 5 portable toilets with handwashing stations projected at $5,000.00.

Land use costs are unknown subject to city or county availability. Cost of monthly rent of commercial or industrial area property is unknown and, therefore, not projected.

Cost of general premises liability policy is unknown but not believed to cause program cost to exceed estimated budget.

In kind social services provided by County Health Services Agency and County Mental Health are not estimated or included.

Summary
As a Program Manager, I understand that several important questions must be discussed and resolved before a project of this scope can go forward. As this program is both scalable and modellable in concept, the idea of providing additional services such as housing, employment and benefit navigation as well as behavioral health assistance is well within the potential parameters of this proposal. If we are ever to effectively address the challenges of homelessness in our community, we must embrace all reasonable approaches to the issue. That means that ideas which hold the promise of positive outcomes for the unsheltered among us must be given full and fair consideration. The Safe Parking Program is such an opportunity.

Respectfully submitted,
/s/
Steve Pleich, JD
Executive Director
Homeless Persons Legal Assistance Project

31.558 1.477
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Nancy Meyberg <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 12:48 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Oversized Vechicle Parking Regulations
Dear Council Members, our family members strongly support the direction the Council is going in to regulate oversized vehicles parking in neighborhoods and adjoining recreational areas. We feel that recreational vehicles under 20 feet should be included in the restrictions. Providing safe and sanitary spaces to accommodate some overnight parking makes sense but unfortunately there is no overall solution in sight. Other communities have moved aggressively against recreational vehicle parking thus making the west side of Santa Cruz an attractive venue. Health and safety issues especially with regard to children must override other considerations.

The position taken by the Coastal Commission needs to be revisited : coastal access is hampered by vehicles taking up residency in prime coastal areas where there is limited parking for visitor access. California needs to enact a fair share doctrine so that receptive communities like the City of Santa Cruz are not overburdened with relentless social issues.

The Council would be well advised to initiate a State mandate by involving our State Representatives. Without fair share involvement at real levels Santa Cruz will continue to be overburdened by growing social issues. As we enact restrictions that are necessary we need to also set in motion potential solutions to offset the overwhelming impacts of economic disparity. The State needs to be intricately involved in alleviating the disproportionate impacts on places like Santa Cruz.

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy Tab®4

31.559 1.478
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: avery snow <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 12:54 PM
To: City Council
Subject: RV Ordinance
Dear City Council,
While we should all have compassion for the less fortunate and unhoused, the RVs campers, particularly the concentration of them on the west side of town around Delaware Ave, have created numerous well documented problems for the City. Clearly more enforcement of existing laws and new regulations are needed for the health and safety of the community as a whole as well as the RV occupants.

I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance if enforcement of the ordinance is independent of the safe parking program and residential annual oversized parking permits are limited to one (1) per address and require current address documentation.

Thanks for your consideration.
-Eric Grodberg

31.560 1.479
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Dennis DeMille <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 1:26 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I realize these RV Owners, many who have fallen on hard times, need a place to go. But, Comprehensive Planning, Restrictions, and Enforcement are needed if this problem is to be resolved and neighborhoods protected.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,

31.561 1.480
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: [email protected]
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 1:35 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Dear Honorable Council Members,
Our Residential and Business parking is already at capacity in many areas of the City, the impact of Oversized Vehicle parking only creates more problems.

I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Sheila Prado
Santa Cruz Commercial Business Owner
831 345 3327

31.562 1.481
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Carol Polhamus <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 1:41 PM
To: City Council; Donna Meyers
Subject: I support Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Dear Mayor Meyers, Vice Mayor Brunner and council members:

I am writing in support of the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance.

It is not compassionate to permit the current situation to continue.  The status quo hurts local business owners, neighborhoods and neighbors, and the environment, not to mention those sleeping in their vehicles.

Homeless advocates indicate that they feel it is more compassionate to leave people alone.  In my opinion, leaving people alone is negligent.  We should try to improve people’s living situations and address the circumstances that got them there, not leave them to their own devices when clearly they need help.  One way to do that is to provide places for people who are currently living in their vehicles to park safely, where they have adequate sanitation facilities and access to county provided social services to assist them.  These parking sites need to be on city/county properties, not in city neighborhoods.  The county needs to be involved in delivering necessary social services.  And accountability needs to be built into the program to insure that our limited resources are used effectively.

True compassion equals action.  I support this ordinance as one step toward addressing this challenging issue, which affects the quality of life of all of us.

Yours,
Carol Polhamus
Sent from my iPad.  Please excuse spelling mistakes and brevity.  Thanks!

31.563 1.482
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Kaila Bongiovanni <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 1:54 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Kaila Bongiovanni
278 Cypress Park
Santa Cruz, CA 95060

31.564 1.483
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Suzie Golden-Riley <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 1:56 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Suzie Golden-Riley

31.565 1.484
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: James Gill <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 1:01 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Oversized vehicle Ordinance
From: James Gill <[email protected]>
Subject: Oversized vehicle Ordinance
Date: September 17, 2021 at 9:09:39 PM PDT
To: [email protected]
We strongly support the passage of this ordinance. We live near W. Cliff Dr. and in recent years we’ve noticed the same oversized vans parking in the pull-out parking spaces for months, presumably leaving in the midnight to 5 AM stretch and then moving right back in the morning. Many of them now park, during the night, on side streets such as John St. where we live. They leave rubbish in people’s yards, and some of them appear to engage in drug sale activity. Along the W. Cliff bike path, there are sections where so much from the vans is sometimes spread into the bike path that joggers, bikers, etc. have to move well out of the way to get past. Human waste and toilet paper is sometimes left in the iceplant next to the bike path. The same kind of activity has been going on for years along Delaware, Swanton. and Natural Bridges Dr.. In jogging to the Westside Toadal Fitness, we have observed, on the sidewalks by the vans, large piles of rubbish, including food, paper plates with meals still on them, plastic and paper cups, and clothing. Recently, by one van the sidewalk was covered in vomit. The vans often have their generators going for hours, which cannot be good for the environment. We hope this first step towards dealing with the problem will be passed. Please consider a requirement, if parking places for vans are provided, that the people are from our county. Otherwise, as with folks in the homeless encampments, we’ll have even more vans coming here because of the reputaion Santa Cruz has for tolerance of drug activity and illegal camping. Thank you. Catharine and James Gill

31.566 1.485
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Peter Canepa <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 1:49 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members, I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses. I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff. Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance. Sincerely,
Peter Canepa
831-239-3563

31.567 1.486
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: brandt schmitz <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 2:42 PM
Cc: Donna Meyers; Sandy Brown; Andrew Mills; City Council; Justin Cummings; Lee Butler; Larry Imwalle; Martine Watkins; Renee Golder; Sonja Brunner; Shebreh KalantariJohnson Subject: Vote NO on Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Dear Council,
The proposed Oversized Vehicles Ordinance (OVO) is inhumane. It doesn't make any sense for a policy to be put in place that keeps folks moving around like this, in danger of being ticketed or towed. It is like pouring salt in a wound of someone already struggling. Not to mention the money it takes to run a program like this, and the money to have cops ticketing them and processing the paperwork, etc. From what I understand from the proposal is that it would only allow for something like 12 days of legal parking a month anyways. It is a lose-lose situation.

I just think so much more of our creativity and energy could go into actually finding solutions to get folks housed safely, instead of continuing to shuffle them around. Imagine how you would feel if you were constantly having to find safe places to park, with no physical address to register a permit and no extra funds to pay for one. What if this were you or a loved one? I am continuously baffled by the lack of compassion and care I see all around us.

What we need are more services without the threat of criminalization! Do not allow OVO to become policy!
Thank you,
Brandt Schmitz

31.568 1.487
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Sabina H <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 2:47 PM
To: City Council
Cc: Andrew Mills; Donna Meyers; Justin Cummings; Lee Butler; Larry Imwalle; Martine Watkins; Renee Golder; Sandy Brown; Sonja Brunner; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson Subject: Vote NO on Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Dear Council,
The proposed Oversized Vehicles Ordinance (OVO) is unresearched, counterproductive, and unacceptable.

At the September 21, 2021 council meeting, we learned that the goal of OVO is to give police enhanced tools to “move vehicles along”. According to the City Attorney, enforcing current environmental and nuisance laws is ineffectual. He said, “just writing a citation, even if it’s a misdemeanor, even if you could arrest someone and take them into custody, the way the court process works these days, they would be right back out on the street within an hour and go back to a parked RV and continue to engage in the conduct we’re trying to address”. It seems that instead of acknowledging that ticketing, towing, and writing misdemeanors are not an effective way of managing homelessness (as supported by decades of research), the city will double down and create a new tool to incarcerate people who cannot afford to comply with the OVO, all while not significantly providing resources that would help people to avoid engaging in so-called “nuisance behaviors”. Many of these “nuisance behaviors” are acts of survival by our marginalized neighbors who have been abandoned by the city. The repeated reference to the need to address health and safety concerns, without acknowledging that the health and safety of people sleeping in vehicles for survival is severely impacted by removing their shelter is disgusting and clearly in opposition with Health In All Policies.

The proposed solution, as outlined by Mills, is that OVO will allow the city to cite misdemeanor infractions, take an individual into custody, have the city attorney prosecute the individual, levy fines on a person living in poverty, and then tow their vehicle when they are unable to comply. Additionally, Andy Mills disclosed that towing is incredibly resource intensive and expensive and that the city has had to create a brand new tow-yard in order to accommodate the RVs and vehicles seized during “Operation Westside Story”. Even more money and resources will be spent fighting lawsuits that challenge the constitutionality of OVO and appealing to the coastal commission, who called the last version of ordinance “onerous,” “drastic” and “draconian” I am outraged that city resources will be used to create more unsheltered homelessness and deepen cycles of poverty.

Those very same city resources should be used for productive solutions that use city property for safe sleeping programs, help vehicles get registered, provide free sanitary methods for grey water disposal, and provide more refuse services (all services that would be of benefit to all community members).

The bottom line is people have nowhere else to go. It is not enough to include vague mention of safe sleeping programs while prioritizing criminalization of our most vulnerable neighbors. The Affiliated Faith Community (AFC) has been operating its SafeSpaces Parking Program for years and it is currently the ONLY resource being offered when police force people to move their vehicles under threat of ticketing and misdemeanors. They are required by law to provide a safe place to sleep when they displace someone from their survival shelter; however, as program director, Reverend Joseph Jacobs, shared at the city council meeting a month ago: Despite this reliance on referral to AFC (who operates 41 overnight parking spaces), the city has *never* funded their services and, recently, even refused to financially support expansion. Instead, these programs have been mentioned only as an afterthought, despite being proven to provide stability and bolster the ability to transition

31.569 1.488
2 to housing, in addition to offering a more dignified survival option to being unsheltered. The city continues to be disingenuous about their support of existing programs and there are simply not enough alternative shelters and housing available.

We need action that prioritizes listening to and coordinating with experts: our houseless community, community advocates and service providers, researchers who study houselessness, and the County Health and Human Service Departments.

We demand services without the threat of criminalization! Do not allow OVO to become policy! Thank you,
Sabina Holber

31.570 1.489
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Kayla Kumar <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 3:03 PM
To: City Council
Cc: Martine Watkins; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Renee Golder; Donna Meyers; Justin Cummings; Sandy Brown; Sonja Brunner; Lee Butler; Andrew Mills; Larry Imwalle Subject: Vote NO on Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Dear Council,
I am a Westside residents and I’ve lived on the Westside for 6 years, with a total of 8 years here in Santa Cruz.

I’m writing to share with you that I believe the proposed Oversized Vehicles Ordinance (OVO) is unresearched, counterproductive, and unacceptable.

At the September 21, 2021 council meeting, we learned that the goal of OVO is to give police enhanced tools to “move vehicles along”. According to the City Attorney, enforcing current environmental and nuisance laws is ineffectual. He said, “just writing a citation, even if it’s a misdemeanor, even if you could arrest someone and take them into custody, the way the court process works these days, they would be right back out on the street within an hour and go back to a parked RV and continue to engage in the conduct we’re trying to address”. It seems that instead of acknowledging that ticketing, towing, and writing misdemeanors are not an effective way of managing homelessness (as supported by decades of research), the city will double down and create a new tool to incarcerate people who cannot afford to comply with the OVO, all while not significantly providing resources that would help people to avoid engaging in so‐called “nuisance behaviors”. Many of these “nuisance behaviors” are acts of survival by our marginalized neighbors who have been abandoned by the city. The repeated reference to the need to address health and safety concerns, without acknowledging that the health and safety of people sleeping in vehicles for survival is severely impacted by removing their shelter is disgusting and clearly in opposition with Health In All Policies.

The proposed solution, as outlined by Mills, is that OVO will allow the city to cite misdemeanor infractions, take an individual into custody, have the city attorney prosecute the individual, levy fines on a person living in poverty, and then tow their vehicle when they are unable to comply. Additionally, Andy Mills disclosed that towing is incredibly resource intensive and expensive and that the city has had to create a brand new tow‐yard in order to accommodate the RVs and vehicles seized during “Operation Westside Story”. Even more money and resources will be spent fighting lawsuits that challenge the constitutionality of OVO and appealing to the coastal commission, who called the last version of ordinance “onerous,” “drastic” and “draconian” I am outraged that city resources will be used to create more unsheltered homelessness and deepen cycles of poverty. Those very same city resources should be used for productive solutions that use city property for safe sleeping programs, help vehicles get registered, provide free sanitary methods for grey water disposal, and provide more refuse services (all services that would be of benefit to all community members).

The bottom line is people have nowhere else to go. It is not enough to include vague mention of safe sleeping programs while prioritizing criminalization of our most vulnerable neighbors. The Affiliated Faith Community (AFC) has been operating its SafeSpaces Parking Program for years and it is currently the ONLY resource being offered when police force people to move their vehicles under threat of ticketing and misdemeanors. They are required by law to provide a safe place to sleep when they displace someone from their survival shelter;

31.571 1.490
2 however, as program director, Reverend Joseph Jacobs, shared at the city council meeting a month ago:

Despite this reliance on referral to AFC (who operates 41 overnight parking spaces), the city has *never* funded their services and, recently, even refused to financially support expansion. Instead, these programs have been mentioned only as an afterthought, despite being proven to provide stability and bolster the ability to transition to housing, in addition to offering a more dignified survival option to being unsheltered. The city continues to be disingenuous about their support of existing programs and there are simply not enough alternative shelters and housing available.

We need action that prioritizes listening to and coordinating with experts: our houseless community, community advocates and service providers, researchers who study houselessness, and the County Health and Human Service Departments.

We demand services without the threat of criminalization! Do not allow OVO to become policy! Thank you,
Kayla Kumar

31.572 1.491
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Malka Nagel <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 3:35 PM
To: City Council; Donna Meyers; Renee Golder; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Sonja Brunner; Justin Cummings; Sandy Brown; Martine Watkins
Subject: Support For Oversided Vehicle Ordinance With Edits Dear City Council, I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance if and only if enforcement of the ordinance is independent of the safe parking program and residential annual oversized parking permits are limited to one (1) per address and require current address documentation.

Malka Nagel
710 Pelton

31.573 1.492
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Colleen Bowman <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 3:54 PM
To: City Council; Donna Meyers; Renee Golder; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Sonja Brunner; Justin Cummings; Sandy Brown; Martine Watkins
Subject: Support For Oversided Vehicle Ordinance With Edits Dear City Council, I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance if and only if enforcement of the ordinance is independent of the safe parking program and residential annual oversized parking permits are limited to one (1) per address and require current address documentation.

Colleen Bowman
Sent from my iPad

31.574 1.493
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Jon Bowman <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 4:24 PM
To: City Council; Donna Meyers; Renee Golder; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Sonja Brunner; Justin Cummings; Sandy Brown; Martine Watkins
Subject: Support For Oversided Vehicle Ordinance With Edits Dear City Council, I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance if and only if enforcement of the ordinance is independent of the safe parking program and residential annual oversized parking permits are limited to one (1) per address and require current address documentation.

Sincerely,
Jon Bowman
Sent from my iPad

31.575 1.494
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Wes Musitelli <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 2:30 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members, I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses. I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff. Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

We have recently observed people camping in oversize vehicles in our area. They leave behind garbage & in some instances drain their holding tanks into the gutter. We have also experienced an increase in vehicle break-ins. We need more enforcement or these problems will get out of control.

Sincerely,
Wes Musitelli

31.576 1.495
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: katie musitelli <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 2:30 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses. I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff. Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Katie Musitelli

31.577 1.496
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Ron Kusel <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 3:06 PM
To: City Council
Cc: Patrick Mcdonald
Subject: Oversized vehicles ordnance
Sternly support
Sent from my iPhone

31.578 1.497
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: KATHY GOLDMAN <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 3:27 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,

31.579 1.498
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Sommer Main <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 3:27 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.  I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.Sincerely,<Sommer and Casey Main
Sent from my iPhone

31.580 1.499
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Work <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 3:28 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
City Council,
As a longtime property and general tax payer of Santa Cruz I can not even understand how this parking ordinance was even a possibility to consider. Every day I drive to or from work or just out to do some local shopping and I am amazed at the amount of garbage and visual pollution this city has taken on. I am disgusted in what the town will allow and what now appears to be the norm.

Do not allow these vehicles to take our city into even further decline. Think about us as tax payers and put us first! The occupants of these oversized vehicles have no regard for our city’s health nor us the tax payers. They leave a wake of garbage, raw sewage and stripped bikes that were stolen from those who you are now asking for compassionate support for a disaster of an idea.

Separate the county transients from other areas. Transport the out of county transients back to their own counties. Move the Santa Cruz county transients out of town to city owned industrial land and give them water, Porto‐potty’s and food but don’t slap us in the face and put the transients amongst us hard working tax payers.

It may not be their fault for where they are today but it isn’t ours either. You can’t please everyone so please the tax payers. It’s your best option for any chance of support down the road.

Thank you,
Martin Dinning
Sent from my iPad

31.581 1.500
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Susan Brown <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 3:33 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Aren't there any places OUT of TOWN that can be used as temporary parking? With porta potties, garbage etc.? suggest a small extra tax on ALL oversized vehicles --and/or small parcel tax to pay for this...But not for longer term parking in any case! Also what is the STate of CA doing about this? Sincerely,
Susan L. Brown
417 Van Ness AVe. Santa Cruz, CA 95060

31.582 1.501
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Maria <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 3:45 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Over Sized Vehicle Ordinance - Misdemeanors for an "Unleashed Animal" ???? Dear City Council,
According to one subsection of the draft version of the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance before you, the presence of an unleashed animal outside of a RV could be punishable by a misdemeanor. This harsh punishment seems punitive and grossly unfair. At most, this should be an infraction level offense.

Likewise, an RV owner could receive a misdemeanor for a number of other minor nuisance crimes under the proposed ordinance, including the presence of garbage outside of the vehicle, which may not even have come from the RV owner.

This subsection seems ripe for abuse by law enforcement. There is quite a bit of academia on the subject.

Please see:

The Misdemeanor System Reinforces Economic Inequality
https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/misdemeanor-system-reinforces-economic-inequality "In the United States, involvement with the criminal justice system can lead to economic barriers such as hiring discrimination and lower wages, which disproportionately hurt Black Americans and people struggling with poverty. These financial consequences can be severe even in cases that involve misdemeanor convictions for relatively minor offenses, such as loitering or trespassing. In a new report, Conviction, Imprisonment, and Lost Earnings, the Brennan Center estimates how criminal convictions and prison sentences depress individual’s earnings. Compounded over time, these losses reinforce patterns of economic inequality and racial disparities in wealth."
Please view:

Racially Charged: America's Misdemeanor Problem LIVESTREAM FICPFM • Brave New Films (BNF) https://youtu.be/OHnzqQIkJaM
"As seen in the film, this misdemeanor system has led to the deaths of countless innocent black people including George Floyd and Eric Garner. George Floyd was approached because of a misdemeanor (using a fake $20 bill) and Garner was approached for the misdemeanor offense of selling loose cigarettes. Our misdemeanor system acts in many ways like a gateway for police violence. If we want justice for George Floyd we need to convict the cop who murdered him but we also need to dismantle the system that led to his murder." Here is what your draft Oversized Vehicle Ordinance states will qualify for misdemeanors:

Section 10.40.120 (d)

31.583 1.502
2 "No person, who owns or maintains an oversized vehicle, shall permit the area surrounding the oversized vehicle to be maintained in an unsafe, untidy, and/or unsanitary/unhygienic fashion. Surrounding areas must be kept free from litter, debris, waste, discarded food products, discarded hypodermic needles, discarded property, improperly disposed gray or black water, unleashed animals, and garbage. A violation of this subdivision shall be a misdemeanor, and may subject the vehicle to towing pursuant to Vehicle Code section 22651(h)(1)." Thank you for reading this email, and for your service to the City of Santa Cruz.

31.584 1.503
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Terri L <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 3:51 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
To our hard working council.  We are all in this together and each of us wants to support each other.  Having said this I’m certain we can reach agreement to create ‘safe, convenient ’ grounds to shelter campers while in transition.  For there to be a semblance of order and respect I support the ‘oversized Vehicle Ordinance’.

Thanks
Terri
Council Members,<BR><BR>I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.  <BR><BR>I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.<BR><BR>Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.<BR><BR>Sincerely,<BR><BR> Sent from my iPad

31.585 1.504
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Ronald Jr Perrigo <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 3:52 PM
To: City Council
Subject: OVERSIZE VEHICLE ORDINANCE

CITY COUNCIL, I SUPPORT THE OVER SIZE VEHICLE ORDINANCE COMING BEFORE COUNCIL,

THOSE VEHICLES HAVE ZERO BUSINESS CAMPING IN RESIDENTIAL OR INDUSTRIAL

NEIGHBORHOODS, BUT REQUIRE THE SUPPORT OF TRAVEL PARK AMENITIES, LIKE POTABLE

WATER, AND ELECTRIC HOOK UPS, AND SANITARY DISPOSAL FACILITIES,

THANK YOU, RON PERRIGO JR, SANTA CRUZ

31.586 1.505
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Maria <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 3:57 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Oversized Vehicle Ordinance - Safe Sleeping Zones Dear City Council,
The Oversized Vehicle Ordinance should not apply when an eligible vehicle’s driver is excluded from a safe parking program due to a lack of parking capacity.

If a homeless RV owner has tried to get into a safe sleep program and the program is full, they should not be punished for parking overnight on city streets without a permit.

I pulled some of the language of this letter from the recent editorial published in the Santa Cruz Sentinel on the subject.

Please read the editorial in full:

Editorial | Why the best answer to RV problems is setting up safe parking zones By EDITORIAL BOARD | [email protected] | Santa Cruz Sentinel October 1, 2021 at 5:00 a.m.

If you’re a police dispatcher (or police chief) in Santa Cruz, or a member of the City Council, you’re likely to spend a fair amount of your worklife trying to placate angry neighborhood residents about recreational vehicles parked on their streets.

The Great RV issue, with the cumbersome vehicles often housing the unhoused, has been part and parcel of the seemingly intractable debate over homeless in the city and in the unincorporated areas of the county.

If neighbors, and some city officials had their druthers, RVs would be quickly towed away in response to complaints.

But that isn’t the reality – and shouldn’t be.

Residents might respond, “Easy for you to say. You don’t have a 25-year-old, ready-for-the-junkyard RV parked in front of your house. If you did, you’d change your tune.” It’s an enforcement issue that perplexes Santa Cruz elected leaders and demands a lot of precious time from overburdened police officers, and it will require going forward with creative, even unpopular, decisions.

As it stands, the Santa Cruz City Council has tabled the discussion of a revised RV ordinance to its Oct. 26 meeting. The council, among other requests, wants city officials to possibly start working toward a citysanctioned vehicle overnight parking program. The proposed parking ban would be effective from midnight to 5 a.m. and would not apply when an eligible vehicle’s driver is excluded from a safe parking program due to a lack of parking capacity.

31.587 1.506
2 Such a “safe parking” program at an undetermined site would provide a compassionate response to people who through no fault of their own, find it impossible to find affordable housing in our expensive county. But any new ordinance should not sanction illegal practices or unlawful behavior.

The original Santa Cruz ordinance adopted in 2015 has remained largely unenforceable in RV-impacted Westside neighborhoods since the California Coastal Commission essentially shot the law down in 2016. As with any possible solutions to homeless issues, there’s no easy, universally accepted, answers.

The city of Berkeley, probably even more politically progressive than Santa Cruz, recently set up a new 40-RV safe parking site that will allow people who have been living out of vehicles a chance to move into a fenced off lot near a homeless shelter. But not all RV residents favor a move, saying living behind a wire fence and having to restrict visitors is hardly the stability they’ve been seeking.

Locally, setting up RV parking zones will undoubtedly bring adamant opposition from residents who live nearby any such spaces, which usually have been in church parking lots.

But what’s the alternative? Towing vehicles parked on residential streets will just put more people on the streets, often in dangerous situations including unsanctioned camps, and further stress public health services, not to mention cops who already have their hands full dealing with the myriad problems of local homeless.

As it is, Santa Cruz police towed 147 RVs last year – and plan to continue towing efforts, which are limited to taking away unregistered vehicles and those with unpaid parking tickets or other legal issues.

RVs, however, can legally park on streets for up to 72 hours before having to move to a non-specific but generally agreed upon “reasonable” distance. The SCPD does not, however, simply tow when an angry neighbor complains about RVs.

Writing tickets on vehicles that overstay time limits is one thing; towing, as noted above, is quite another. It’s also unrealistic, and probably unenforceable, to stipulate that no RVs or camping vehicles can be parked on residential streets. For instance, what about work trucks? How about surfers who park in the Westside of Santa Cruz, or in the Pleasure Point area of Live Oak?
Moreover, what happens to towed vehicles? Towing companies don’t want them in their yards.

The city was sending towed RVs to an area near the city landfill on Dimeo Lane, but too many RVs and too many problems with how to dismantle or recycle them now have police searching for an alternative site.

Uncontrolled RV parking is a health, safety and peace-of-mind issue. But the only reasonable solution is finding a site where more than just a handful of RVs can stay.
https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2021/10/01/editorial-why-the-best-answer-to-rv-problems-is-setting-upsafe-parking-zones/ Thank you for reading this email and for your service to the City of Santa Cruz.

31.588 1.507
From: Frank Kline
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Date: Sunday, October 24, 2021 4:03:35 PM
Council Members,
I live on the Westside and walk frequently out at the marine lab with friends. It is very disturbing for us to see all the trashy RV’s leaving their rubbish scattered everywhere in addition to the screaming and yelling of mentally disturbed/ drug addled people. Of course, it is not just the end of Delaware either. There is a crazy man who parks on our street a few days each week and screams frightening things at all within ear shot while the police do nothing when called because they say their hands are tied! My 3 year old granddaughter lives on our street so you can imagine my reaction. It feels like our town is under siege. Enough already!! Please do something and vote yes on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance.

Sincerely, Frank Kline

31.589 1.508
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Sarah Leonard <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 4:04 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Sarah Leonard

31.590 1.509
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Zane Brown <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 4:13 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Zane Brown
Sent from my iPhone

31.591 1.510
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Joe De Meo <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 4:21 PM
To: City Council
Subject: RV ordinance
Esteemed City council members,
please pass the RV rules that have been proposed. The quality of life in our beautiful city has been changed by a small group of lawless people that have been allowed to illegally park Here. The needs of a few have trampled on the rights of the many citizens of this city. You are all aware of the crime and environmental hazards theseRVs have caused.

Some of you may feel you are being compassionate leaving things alone. You are not. Many come here because the word is out our laws aren’t enforced. When I read interviews of homeless the majority of them are not from here. Even the woman who ran for council is from the valley, not here. Our small town can’t support all these people. Please make the move for us to take back our town.

Regards Joe De Meo

31.592 1.511
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Ann Niland <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 4:40 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Dear Council Members,
I am once again contacting you in support of an Oversized Vehicle Ordinance. I live on the lower westside near Natural Bridges state park. I routinely walk along Delaware to reach the Seymour Marine Lab. I no longer feel safe walking that route due to the preponderance of broken down RVs, sewage smells/spills, illegal fires and garbage.

On my street we also have oversized RVs camping every night of the week, all year long. There are usually 3-4 vehicles camped at the end of the street including 1-2 RVs and several vans. Some of these same campers move to West Cliff parking lots and spend all day, every day camping there until sundown. Since there are no restroom facilities, I assume they are disposing of raw sewage in the ocean.

I would like to see strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance. I would also like to see reasonable time limits in West Cliff parking lots to free up parking for visitors. Allowing the status quo serves no one.

Sincerely,
Ann Niland
138 Merced Avenue
Santa Cruz

31.593 1.512
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Rikki Lougee <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 2:59 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Vote NO on OVO
Dear Council,
The proposed Oversized Vehicles Ordinance (OVO) is unresearched, counterproductive, and unacceptable.

At the September 21, 2021 council meeting, we learned that the goal of OVO is to give police enhanced tools to “move vehicles along”. According to the City Attorney, enforcing current environmental and nuisance laws is ineffectual. He said, “just writing a citation, even if it’s a misdemeanor, even if you could arrest someone and take them into custody, the way the court process works these days, they would be right back out on the street within an hour and go back to a parked RV and continue to engage in the conduct we’re trying to address”. It seems that instead of acknowledging that ticketing, towing, and writing misdemeanors are not an effective way of managing homelessness (as supported by decades of research), the city will double down and create a new tool to incarcerate people who cannot afford to comply with the OVO, all while not significantly providing resources that would help people to avoid engaging in so-called “nuisance behaviors”. Many of these “nuisance behaviors” are acts of survival by our marginalized neighbors who have been abandoned by the city. The repeated reference to the need to address health and safety concerns, without acknowledging that the health and safety of people sleeping in vehicles for survival is severely impacted by removing their shelter is disgusting and clearly in opposition with Health In All Policies.

The proposed solution, as outlined by Mills, is that OVO will allow the city to cite misdemeanor infractions, take an individual into custody, have the city attorney prosecute the individual, levy fines on a person living in poverty, and then tow their vehicle when they are unable to comply. Additionally, Andy Mills disclosed that towing is incredibly resource intensive and expensive and that the city has had to create a brand new tow-yard in order to accommodate the RVs and vehicles seized during “Operation Westside Story”. Even more money and resources will be spent fighting lawsuits that challenge the constitutionality of OVO and appealing to the coastal commission, who called the last version of ordinance “onerous,” “drastic” and “draconian” I am outraged that city resources will be used to create more unsheltered homelessness and deepen cycles of poverty.

Those very same city resources should be used for productive solutions that use city property for safe sleeping programs, help vehicles get registered, provide free sanitary methods for grey water disposal, and provide more refuse services (all services that would be of benefit to all community members).

The bottom line is people have nowhere else to go. It is not enough to include vague mention of safe sleeping programs while prioritizing criminalization of our most vulnerable neighbors. The Affiliated Faith Community (AFC) has been operating its SafeSpaces Parking Program for years and it is currently the ONLY resource being offered when police force people to move their vehicles under threat of ticketing and misdemeanors. They are required by law to provide a safe place to sleep when they displace someone from their survival shelter; however, as program director, Reverend Joseph Jacobs, shared at the city council meeting a month ago: Despite this reliance on referral to AFC (who operates 41 overnight parking spaces), the city has *never* funded their services and, recently, even refused to financially support expansion. Instead, these programs have been mentioned only as an afterthought, despite being proven to provide stability and bolster the ability to transition to housing, in addition to offering a more dignified survival option to being unsheltered. The city continues to be disingenuous about their support of existing programs and there are simply not enough alternative shelters

31.594 1.513
2 and housing available.

We need action that prioritizes listening to and coordinating with experts: our houseless community, community advocates and service providers, researchers who study houselessness, and the County Health and Human Service Departments.

We demand services without the threat of criminalization! Do not allow OVO to become policy! Thank you,
Rikki Lougee

31.595 1.514
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Dennis Webb <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 4:41 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Good afternoon Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses. I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Dennis Webb

31.596 1.515
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: [email protected]
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 4:53 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff. Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Annie Manako
Sent from my iPhone

31.597 1.516
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Paul Brown <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 4:57 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,

31.598 1.517
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Keith Andrews <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 5:26 PM
To: City Council
Subject: RV Parking on Westside Streets and the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance Dear City Council,
First, because of the untenable situation on the Westside, I strongly support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance, but only if enforcement of the ordinance is independent of the safe parking program and residential annual oversized parking permits are limited to one (1) per address and require current address documentation.

Regarding that safe parking program that would exempt a new Oversized Vehicle Ordinance from Martin v Boise scrutiny, I do have a practical recommendation that uses existing facilities:

City and County owned parking garages and lots are very busy during business hours, but have very little legitimate usage at night.

These unused windows in time could be taken advantage of in a free safe parking program. This program would only require a survey to identify likely locations, and then patrol staffing to insure that the spaces are freed up for each usage (day and night). Portable rest rooms would only be required in locations not already equipped with these services.

The downtown locations would be convenient for the campers to access all of the free services provided by the Homeless Services Center, soup kitchens, Food Not Bombs, etc.

Perhaps a corner of the Emeline County services parking lot or lawn (a very logical prime location for a nighttime-only safe parking program) could house a safe storage facility, at first in a temporary building? The use of the Emeline facility would be a great way for the county to provide the first real evidence that they actually are willing to shoulder some of this burden as they have stated. And the campers would enjoy easy early morning access to all of the free services including Needle Exchange provided there.

Another great location for a smaller nighttime-only safe parking program could be at the County Courthouse parking lot. There are already restrooms present, and any campers with morning court dates might be more likely to appear if they could camp right there.

Of course, it is only fair that some of the safe parking locations would also be in similar Mid-County and Watsonville locations.

Spreading safe parking locations around the county would also make it easier for the working unhoused to camp safely near their jobs.

Using existing parking facilities would be a great cost-effective way to provide safe parking, while allowing the city to do its' job and break up all of the established unsanctioned crime-ridden drug camps and keep everybody moving. This could go a long way in abating the crime and environmental degradation that currently plague Santa Cruz, while providing for the working unhoused and achieving full Martin v Boise compliance.

Sincerely,
Keith Andrews


31.599 1.518
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Andy’s Comcast <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 8:40 PM
To: City Council; Donna Meyers; Renee Golder; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Sonja Brunner; Justin Cummings; Sandy Brown; Martine Watkins
Subject: Support For Oversided Vehicle Ordinance With Amdendments Dear City Council,
Westside families like mine have been subject to the environmental and public health hazards caused by the unchecked RV dwellers on Delaware, Swanton, Natural Bridges and Shaffer long enough.  Never ending trash, raw sewage discharged to the street, and dangerous wiring from generators are just a few of the hazards infiltrating our neighborhood.

I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance if and only if enforcement of the ordinance is independent of the safe parking program and residential annual oversized parking permits are limited to one (1) per address and require current address documentation.

Please get this done and return the neighborhoods to families.

Thank you,
Andrew Gere
222 Chico Ave.

Santa Cruz, CA 95060
Sent from my iPad

31.600 1.519
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Madison Spears <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 10:14 PM
To: City Council
Cc: Martine Watkins; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Renee Golder; Donna Meyers; Justin Cummings; Sandy Brown; Sonja Brunner; Lee Butler; Andrew Mills; Larry Imwalle Subject: Vote NO on Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Dear Council,
The proposed Oversized Vehicles Ordinance (OVO) is unresearched, counterproductive, and unacceptable.

At the September 21, 2021 council meeting, we learned that the goal of OVO is to give police enhanced tools to “move vehicles along”. According to the City Attorney, enforcing current environmental and nuisance laws is ineffectual. He said, “just writing a citation, even if it’s a misdemeanor, even if you could arrest someone and take them into custody, the way the court process works these days, they would be right back out on the street within an hour and go back to a parked RV and continue to engage in the conduct we’re trying to address”. It seems that instead of acknowledging that ticketing, towing, and writing misdemeanors are not an effective way of managing homelessness (as supported by decades of research), the city will double down and create a new tool to incarcerate people who cannot afford to comply with the OVO, all while not significantly providing resources that would help people to avoid engaging in so‐called “nuisance behaviors”. Many of these “nuisance behaviors” are acts of survival by our marginalized neighbors who have been abandoned by the city. The repeated reference to the need to address health and safety concerns, without acknowledging that the health and safety of people sleeping in vehicles for survival is severely impacted by removing their shelter is disgusting and clearly in opposition with Health In All Policies.

The proposed solution, as outlined by Mills, is that OVO will allow the city to cite misdemeanor infractions, take an individual into custody, have the city attorney prosecute the individual, levy fines on a person living in poverty, and then tow their vehicle when they are unable to comply. Additionally, Andy Mills disclosed that towing is incredibly resource intensive and expensive and that the city has had to create a brand new tow‐yard in order to accommodate the RVs and vehicles seized during “Operation Westside Story”. Even more money and resources will be spent fighting lawsuits that challenge the constitutionality of OVO and appealing to the coastal commission, who called the last version of ordinance “onerous,” “drastic” and “draconian” I am outraged that city resources will be used to create more unsheltered homelessness and deepen cycles of poverty. Those very same city resources should be used for productive solutions that use city property for safe sleeping programs, help vehicles get registered, provide free sanitary methods for grey water disposal, and provide more refuse services (all services that would be of benefit to all community members).

The bottom line is people have nowhere else to go. It is not enough to include vague mention of safe sleeping programs while prioritizing criminalization of our most vulnerable neighbors. The Affiliated Faith Community (AFC) has been operating its SafeSpaces Parking Program for years and it is currently the ONLY resource being offered when police force people to move their vehicles under threat of ticketing and misdemeanors. They are required by law to provide a safe place to sleep when they displace someone from their survival shelter; however, as program director, Reverend Joseph Jacobs, shared at the city council meeting a month ago:

Despite this reliance on referral to AFC (who operates 41 overnight parking spaces), the city has *never*

31.601 1.520
2 funded their services and, recently, even refused to financially support expansion. Instead, these programs have been mentioned only as an afterthought, despite being proven to provide stability and bolster the ability to transition to housing, in addition to offering a more dignified survival option to being unsheltered. The city continues to be disingenuous about their support of existing programs and there are simply not enough alternative shelters and housing available.

We need action that prioritizes listening to and coordinating with experts: our houseless community, community advocates and service providers, researchers who study houselessness, and the County Health and Human Service Departments.

We demand services without the threat of criminalization! Do not allow OVO to become policy! Thank you,
Madison Spears
Sent from my iPhone

31.602 1.521
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Chris Salem <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 11:19 PM
To: City Council
Cc: Andrew Mills; Donna Meyers; Justin Cummings; Lee Butler; Larry Imwalle; Martine Watkins; Renee Golder; Sandy Brown; Sonja Brunner; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson Subject: Vote NO on Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Dear Council,
The proposed Oversized Vehicles Ordinance (OVO) is unresearched, counterproductive, and unacceptable.

At the September 21, 2021 council meeting, we learned that the goal of OVO is to give police enhanced tools to “move vehicles along”. According to the City Attorney, enforcing current environmental and nuisance laws is ineffectual. He said, “just writing a citation, even if it’s a misdemeanor, even if you could arrest someone and take them into custody, the way the court process works these days, they would be right back out on the street within an hour and go back to a parked RV and continue to engage in the conduct we’re trying to address”. It seems that instead of acknowledging that ticketing, towing, and writing misdemeanors are not an effective way of managing homelessness (as supported by decades of research), the city will double down and create a new tool to incarcerate people who cannot afford to comply with the OVO, all while not significantly providing resources that would help people to avoid engaging in so-called “nuisance behaviors”. Many of these “nuisance behaviors” are acts of survival by our marginalized neighbors who have been abandoned by the city. The repeated reference to the need to address health and safety concerns, without acknowledging that the health and safety of people sleeping in vehicles for survival is severely impacted by removing their shelter is disgusting and clearly in opposition with Health In All Policies.

The proposed solution, as outlined by Mills, is that OVO will allow the city to cite misdemeanor infractions, take an individual into custody, have the city attorney prosecute the individual, levy fines on a person living in poverty, and then tow their vehicle when they are unable to comply. Additionally, Andy Mills disclosed that towing is incredibly resource intensive and expensive and that the city has had to create a brand new tow-yard in order to accommodate the RVs and vehicles seized during “Operation Westside Story”. Even more money and resources will be spent fighting lawsuits that challenge the constitutionality of OVO and appealing to the coastal commission, who called the last version of ordinance “onerous,” “drastic” and “draconian” I am outraged that city resources will be used to create more unsheltered homelessness and deepen cycles of poverty.

Those very same city resources should be used for productive solutions that use city property for safe sleeping programs, help vehicles get registered, provide free sanitary methods for grey water disposal, and provide more refuse services (all services that would be of benefit to all community members).

The bottom line is people have nowhere else to go. It is not enough to include vague mention of safe sleeping programs while prioritizing criminalization of our most vulnerable neighbors. The Affiliated Faith Community (AFC) has been operating its SafeSpaces Parking Program for years and it is currently the ONLY resource being offered when police force people to move their vehicles under threat of ticketing and misdemeanors. They are required by law to provide a safe place to sleep when they displace someone from their survival shelter; however, as program director, Reverend Joseph Jacobs, shared at the city council meeting a month ago: Despite this reliance on referral to AFC (who operates 41 overnight parking spaces), the city has *never* funded their services and, recently, even refused to financially support expansion. Instead, these programs have been mentioned only as an afterthought, despite being proven to provide stability and bolster the ability to transition

31.603 1.522
2 to housing, in addition to offering a more dignified survival option to being unsheltered. The city continues to be disingenuous about their support of existing programs and there are simply not enough alternative shelters and housing available.

We need action that prioritizes listening to and coordinating with experts: our houseless community, community advocates and service providers, researchers who study houselessness, and the County Health and Human Service Departments.

We demand services without the threat of criminalization! Do not allow OVO to become policy! Thank you,
Christopher Salem

31.604 1.523
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Annakate Clemons <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 11:26 PM
To: City Council
Cc: Andrew Mills; Donna Meyers; Justin Cummings; Lee Butler; Larry Imwalle; Martine Watkins; Renee Golder; Sandy Brown; Sonja Brunner; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson Subject: Vote NO on Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Dear Council,
The proposed Oversized Vehicles Ordinance (OVO) is unresearched, counterproductive, and unacceptable.

At the September 21, 2021 council meeting, we learned that the goal of OVO is to give police enhanced tools to “move vehicles along”. According to the City Attorney, enforcing current environmental and nuisance laws is ineffectual. He said, “just writing a citation, even if it’s a misdemeanor, even if you could arrest someone and take them into custody, the way the court process works these days, they would be right back out on the street within an hour and go back to a parked RV and continue to engage in the conduct we’re trying to address”. It seems that instead of acknowledging that ticketing, towing, and writing misdemeanors are not an effective way of managing homelessness (as supported by decades of research), the city will double down and create a new tool to incarcerate people who cannot afford to comply with the OVO, all while not significantly providing resources that would help people to avoid engaging in so-called “nuisance behaviors”. Many of these “nuisance behaviors” are acts of survival by our marginalized neighbors who have been abandoned by the city. The repeated reference to the need to address health and safety concerns, without acknowledging that the health and safety of people sleeping in vehicles for survival is severely impacted by removing their shelter is disgusting and clearly in opposition with Health In All Policies.

The proposed solution, as outlined by Mills, is that OVO will allow the city to cite misdemeanor infractions, take an individual into custody, have the city attorney prosecute the individual, levy fines on a person living in poverty, and then tow their vehicle when they are unable to comply. Additionally, Andy Mills disclosed that towing is incredibly resource intensive and expensive and that the city has had to create a brand new tow-yard in order to accommodate the RVs and vehicles seized during “Operation Westside Story”. Even more money and resources will be spent fighting lawsuits that challenge the constitutionality of OVO and appealing to the coastal commission, who called the last version of ordinance “onerous,” “drastic” and “draconian” I am outraged that city resources will be used to create more unsheltered homelessness and deepen cycles of poverty.

Those very same city resources should be used for productive solutions that use city property for safe sleeping programs, help vehicles get registered, provide free sanitary methods for grey water disposal, and provide more refuse services (all services that would be of benefit to all community members).

The bottom line is people have nowhere else to go. It is not enough to include vague mention of safe sleeping programs while prioritizing criminalization of our most vulnerable neighbors. The Affiliated Faith Community (AFC) has been operating its SafeSpaces Parking Program for years and it is currently the ONLY resource being offered when police force people to move their vehicles under threat of ticketing and misdemeanors. They are required by law to provide a safe place to sleep when they displace someone from their survival shelter; however, as program director, Reverend Joseph Jacobs, shared at the city council meeting a month ago: Despite this reliance on referral to AFC (who operates 41 overnight parking spaces), the city has *never* funded their services and, recently, even refused to financially support expansion. Instead, these programs have been mentioned only as an afterthought, despite being proven to provide stability and bolster the ability to transition

31.605 1.524
2 to housing, in addition to offering a more dignified survival option to being unsheltered. The city continues to be disingenuous about their support of existing programs and there are simply not enough alternative shelters and housing available.

We need action that prioritizes listening to and coordinating with experts: our houseless community, community advocates and service providers, researchers who study houselessness, and the County Health and Human Service Departments.

We demand services without the threat of criminalization! Do not allow OVO to become policy! Thank you,
Annakate Clemons

31.606 1.525
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Skye Braunhut <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 1:09 AM
To: City Council
Cc: Martine Watkins; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Renee Golder; Donna Meyers; Justin Cummings; Sandy Brown; Sonja Brunner; Lee Butler; Andrew Mills; Larry Imwalle Subject: Vote NO on Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Dear Council,
The proposed Oversized Vehicles Ordinance (OVO) is unresearched, counterproductive, and unacceptable.

At the September 21, 2021 council meeting, we learned that the goal of OVO is to give police enhanced tools to “move vehicles along”. According to the City Attorney, enforcing current environmental and nuisance laws is ineffectual. He said, “just writing a citation, even if it’s a misdemeanor, even if you could arrest someone and take them into custody, the way the court process works these days, they would be right back out on the street within an hour and go back to a parked RV and continue to engage in the conduct we’re trying to address”.

It seems that instead of acknowledging that ticketing, towing, and writing misdemeanors are not an effective way of managing homelessness (as supported by decades of research), the city will double down and create a new tool to incarcerate people who cannot afford to comply with the OVO, all while not significantly providing resources that would help people to avoid engaging in so‐called “nuisance behaviors”.

Many of these “nuisance behaviors” are acts of survival by our marginalized neighbors who have been abandoned by the city. The repeated reference to the need to address health and safety concerns, without acknowledging that the health and safety of people sleeping in vehicles for survival is severely impacted by removing their shelter is disgusting and clearly in opposition with Health In All Policies.

The proposed solution, as outlined by Mills, is that OVO will allow the city to cite misdemeanor infractions, take an individual into custody, have the city attorney prosecute the individual, levy fines on a person living in poverty, and then tow their vehicle when they are unable to comply. Additionally, Andy Mills disclosed that towing is incredibly resource intensive and expensive and that the city has had to create a brand new tow‐yard in order to accommodate the RVs and vehicles seized during “Operation Westside Story”.

Even more money and resources will be spent fighting lawsuits that challenge the constitutionality of OVO and appealing to the coastal commission, who called the last version of ordinance “onerous,” “drastic” and “draconian” I am outraged that city resources will be used to create more unsheltered homelessness and deepen cycles of poverty.

Those very same city resources should be used for productive solutions that use city property for safe sleeping programs, help vehicles get registered, provide free sanitary methods for grey water disposal, and provide more refuse services (all services that would be of benefit to all community members).

The bottom line is people have nowhere else to go. It is not enough to include vague mention of safe sleeping programs while prioritizing criminalization of our most vulnerable neighbors. The Affiliated Faith Community

31.607 1.526
2 (AFC) has been operating its SafeSpaces Parking Program for years and it is currently the ONLY resource being offered when police force people to move their vehicles under threat of ticketing and misdemeanors. They are required by law to provide a safe place to sleep when they displace someone from their survival shelter; however, as program director, Reverend Joseph Jacobs, shared at the city council meeting a month ago:

Despite this reliance on referral to AFC (who operates 41 overnight parking spaces), the city has *never* funded their services and, recently, even refused to financially support expansion.

Instead, these programs have been mentioned only as an afterthought, despite being proven to provide stability and bolster the ability to transition to housing, in addition to offering a more dignified survival option to being unsheltered.

The city continues to be disingenuous about their support of existing programs and there are simply not enough alternative shelters and housing available.

We need action that prioritizes listening to and coordinating with experts: our houseless community, community advocates and service providers, researchers who study houselessness, and the County Health and Human Service Departments.

We demand services without the threat of criminalization! Do not allow OVO to become policy! Thank you,
Skye Braunhut

31.608 1.527
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Nolan B <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 7:38 AM
To: City Council
Cc: Andrew Mills; Donna Meyers; Justin Cummings; Lee Butler; Larry Imwalle; Martine Watkins; Renee Golder; Sandy Brown; Sonja Brunner; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson Subject: Vote NO on Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Dear Council,
The proposed Oversized Vehicles Ordinance (OVO) is unresearched, counterproductive, and unacceptable.

At the September 21, 2021 council meeting, we learned that the goal of OVO is to give police enhanced tools to “move vehicles along”. According to the City Attorney, enforcing current environmental and nuisance laws is ineffectual. He said, “just writing a citation, even if it’s a misdemeanor, even if you could arrest someone and take them into custody, the way the court process works these days, they would be right back out on the street within an hour and go back to a parked RV and continue to engage in the conduct we’re trying to address”. It seems that instead of acknowledging that ticketing, towing, and writing misdemeanors are not an effective way of managing homelessness (as supported by decades of research), the city will double down and create a new tool to incarcerate people who cannot afford to comply with the OVO, all while not significantly providing resources that would help people to avoid engaging in so-called “nuisance behaviors”. Many of these “nuisance behaviors” are acts of survival by our marginalized neighbors who have been abandoned by the city. The repeated reference to the need to address health and safety concerns, without acknowledging that the health and safety of people sleeping in vehicles for survival is severely impacted by removing their shelter is disgusting and clearly in opposition with Health In All Policies.

The proposed solution, as outlined by Mills, is that OVO will allow the city to cite misdemeanor infractions, take an individual into custody, have the city attorney prosecute the individual, levy fines on a person living in poverty, and then tow their vehicle when they are unable to comply. Additionally, Andy Mills disclosed that towing is incredibly resource intensive and expensive and that the city has had to create a brand new tow-yard in order to accommodate the RVs and vehicles seized during “Operation Westside Story”. Even more money and resources will be spent fighting lawsuits that challenge the constitutionality of OVO and appealing to the coastal commission, who called the last version of ordinance “onerous,” “drastic” and “draconian” I am outraged that city resources will be used to create more unsheltered homelessness and deepen cycles of poverty.

Those very same city resources should be used for productive solutions that use city property for safe sleeping programs, help vehicles get registered, provide free sanitary methods for grey water disposal, and provide more refuse services (all services that would be of benefit to all community members).

The bottom line is people have nowhere else to go. It is not enough to include vague mention of safe sleeping programs while prioritizing criminalization of our most vulnerable neighbors. The Affiliated Faith Community (AFC) has been operating its SafeSpaces Parking Program for years and it is currently the ONLY resource being offered when police force people to move their vehicles under threat of ticketing and misdemeanors. They are required by law to provide a safe place to sleep when they displace someone from their survival shelter; however, as program director, Reverend Joseph Jacobs, shared at the city council meeting a month ago: Despite this reliance on referral to AFC (who operates 41 overnight parking spaces), the city has *never* funded their services and, recently, even refused to financially support expansion. Instead, these programs have been mentioned only as an afterthought, despite being proven to provide stability and bolster the ability to transition

31.609 1.528
2 to housing, in addition to offering a more dignified survival option to being unsheltered. The city continues to be disingenuous about their support of existing programs and there are simply not enough alternative shelters and housing available.

We need action that prioritizes listening to and coordinating with experts: our houseless community, community advocates and service providers, researchers who study houselessness, and the County Health and Human Service Departments.

We demand services without the threat of criminalization! Do not allow OVO to become policy! Thank you,
Nolan

31.610 1.529
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Isabella Yarme <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 7:40 AM
To: City Council
Cc: Martine Watkins; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Renee Golder; Donna Meyers; Justin Cummings; Sandy Brown; Sonja Brunner; Lee Butler; Andrew Mills; Larry Imwalle Subject: Vote NO on Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Dear Council,
The proposed Oversized Vehicles Ordinance (OVO) is unresearched, counterproductive, and unacceptable.

At the September 21, 2021 council meeting, we learned that the goal of OVO is to give police enhanced tools to “move vehicles along”. According to the City Attorney, enforcing current environmental and nuisance laws is ineffectual. He said, “just writing a citation, even if it’s a misdemeanor, even if you could arrest someone and take them into custody, the way the court process works these days, they would be right back out on the street within an hour and go back to a parked RV and continue to engage in the conduct we’re trying to address”. It seems that instead of acknowledging that ticketing, towing, and writing misdemeanors are not an effective way of managing homelessness (as supported by decades of research), the city will double down and create a new tool to incarcerate people who cannot afford to comply with the OVO, all while not significantly providing resources that would help people to avoid engaging in so‐called “nuisance behaviors”. Many of these “nuisance behaviors” are acts of survival by our marginalized neighbors who have been abandoned by the city. The repeated reference to the need to address health and safety concerns, without acknowledging that the health and safety of people sleeping in vehicles for survival is severely impacted by removing their shelter is disgusting and clearly in opposition with Health In All Policies. The proposed solution, as outlined by Mills, is that OVO will allow the city to cite misdemeanor infractions, take an individual into custody, have the city attorney prosecute the individual, levy fines on a person living in poverty, and then tow their vehicle when they are unable to comply. Additionally, Andy Mills disclosed that towing is incredibly resource intensive and expensive and that the city has had to create a brand new tow‐yard in order to accommodate the RVs and vehicles seized during “Operation Westside Story”. Even more money and resources will be spent fighting lawsuits that challenge the constitutionality of OVO and appealing to the coastal commission, who called the last version of ordinance “onerous,” “drastic” and “draconian” I am outraged that city resources will be used to create more unsheltered homelessness and deepen cycles of poverty. Those very same city resources should be used for productive solutions that use city property for safe sleeping programs, help vehicles get registered, provide free sanitary methods for grey water disposal, and provide more refuse services (all services that would be of benefit to all community members).

The bottom line is people have nowhere else to go. It is not enough to include vague mention of safe sleeping programs while prioritizing criminalization of our most vulnerable neighbors. The Affiliated Faith Community (AFC) has been operating its SafeSpaces Parking Program for years and it is currently the ONLY resource being offered when police force people to move their vehicles under threat of ticketing and misdemeanors. They are required by law to provide a safe place to sleep when they displace someone from their survival shelter; however, as program director, Reverend Joseph Jacobs, shared at the city council meeting a month ago:

Despite this reliance on referral to AFC (who operates 41 overnight parking spaces), the city has *never* funded their services and, recently, even refused to financially support expansion. Instead, these programs have been mentioned only as an afterthought, despite being proven to provide stability and bolster the ability to transition to housing, in addition to offering a more dignified survival option to being unsheltered. The city continues to be disingenuous about their support of existing programs and there are simply not enough alternative shelters and housing available. <BR> <BR>We need action that prioritizes listening to and

31.611 1.530
2 coordinating with experts: our houseless community, community advocates and service providers, researchers who study houselessness, and the County Health and Human Service Departments.

We demand services without the threat of criminalization! Do not allow OVO to become policy! Thank you,
Isabella Yarme
Sent from my iPhone

31.612 1.531
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Ashley Weil <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 7:46 AM
To: City Council
Cc: Martine Watkins; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Renee Golder; Donna Meyers; Justin Cummings; Sandy Brown; Sonja Brunner; Lee Butler; Andrew Mills; Larry Imwalle Subject: Vote NO on Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Dear Council,
The proposed Oversized Vehicles Ordinance (OVO) is unresearched, counterproductive, and unacceptable.

At the September 21, 2021 council meeting, we learned that the goal of OVO is to give police enhanced tools to “move vehicles along”. According to the City Attorney, enforcing current environmental and nuisance laws is ineffectual. He said, “just writing a citation, even if it’s a misdemeanor, even if you could arrest someone and take them into custody, the way the court process works these days, they would be right back out on the street within an hour and go back to a parked RV and continue to engage in the conduct we’re trying to address”. It seems that instead of acknowledging that ticketing, towing, and writing misdemeanors are not an effective way of managing homelessness (as supported by decades of research), the city will double down and create a new tool to incarcerate people who cannot afford to comply with the OVO, all while not significantly providing resources that would help people to avoid engaging in so‐called “nuisance behaviors”. Many of these “nuisance behaviors” are acts of survival by our marginalized neighbors who have been abandoned by the city. The repeated reference to the need to address health and safety concerns, without acknowledging that the health and safety of people sleeping in vehicles for survival is severely impacted by removing their shelter is disgusting and clearly in opposition with Health In All Policies.

The proposed solution, as outlined by Mills, is that OVO will allow the city to cite misdemeanor infractions, take an individual into custody, have the city attorney prosecute the individual, levy fines on a person living in poverty, and then tow their vehicle when they are unable to comply. Additionally, Andy Mills disclosed that towing is incredibly resource intensive and expensive and that the city has had to create a brand new tow‐yard in order to accommodate the RVs and vehicles seized during “Operation Westside Story”. Even more money and resources will be spent fighting lawsuits that challenge the constitutionality of OVO and appealing to the coastal commission, who called the last version of ordinance “onerous,” “drastic” and “draconian” I am outraged that city resources will be used to create more unsheltered homelessness and deepen cycles of poverty. Those very same city resources should be used for productive solutions that use city property for safe sleeping programs, help vehicles get registered, provide free sanitary methods for grey water disposal, and provide more refuse services (all services that would be of benefit to all community members).

The bottom line is people have nowhere else to go. It is not enough to include vague mention of safe sleeping programs while prioritizing criminalization of our most vulnerable neighbors. The Affiliated Faith Community (AFC) has been operating its SafeSpaces Parking Program for years and it is currently the ONLY resource being offered when police force people to move their vehicles under threat of ticketing and misdemeanors. They are required by law to provide a safe place to sleep when they displace someone from their survival shelter; however, as program director, Reverend Joseph Jacobs, shared at the city council meeting a month ago:

Despite this reliance on referral to AFC (who operates 41 overnight parking spaces), the city has *never* funded their services and, recently, even refused to financially support expansion. Instead, these programs

31.613 1.532
2 have been mentioned only as an afterthought, despite being proven to provide stability and bolster the ability to transition to housing, in addition to offering a more dignified survival option to being unsheltered. The city continues to be disingenuous about their support of existing programs and there are simply not enough alternative shelters and housing available. <BR> <BR>We need action that prioritizes listening to and coordinating with experts: our houseless community, community advocates and service providers, researchers who study houselessness, and the County Health and Human Service Departments.

We demand services without the threat of criminalization! Do not allow OVO to become policy! Thank you, Ashley Weil

31.614 1.533
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Samantha Beall <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 9:00 AM
To: City Council; Donna Meyers; Renee Golder; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Sonja Brunner; Justin Cummings; Sandy Brown; Martine Watkins
Subject: Support For Oversided Vehicle Ordinance
Dear City Council, I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance as written on the 10/26 agenda. Thank you for addressing this long-standing issue.

Sam Beall

31.615 1.534
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Dillon Paige <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 9:06 AM
To: City Council; Donna Meyers; Renee Golder; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Sonja Brunner; Justin Cummings; Sandy Brown; Martine Watkins
Subject: Support For Oversided Vehicle Ordinance
Dear City Council,
I am in favor of passing the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance. This problem has impacted the safety of our neighborhoods, the environment, and in the long run does not help people living in their cars. I support the establishment of places on county property where people living in their cars can park overnight safely and receive the services to address what caused them to become homeless in the first place.

Dillon Paige

31.616 1.535
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Mary Hamilton <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 5:42 PM
To: City Council
Subject: oversized camper ordinance
Dear Santa Cruz City Council members,
We whole heartedly support the oversized camper ordinance. These overall, seem to bring about increased crime, litter and waste in our neighborhoods. Also, we pay a great amount of taxes to live in our residential neighborhoods and should not have them becoming camping grounds for RV vehicles who don't even pay any property taxes here. Many of them are even from out of the area and even from out of state. Thank you.

Mary and Tom Hamilton Manor Ave.

31.617 1.536
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Susan Peers <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 6:19 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members, I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, the streets smell of urine-disgusting when taking a walk with your puppies, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses. I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff. Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Susan Peers
2395 Delaware Ave.

31.618 1.537
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Pearce Hendrigsman <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 6:21 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Pearce M Hendrigsman

31.619 1.538
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bruce <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 6:49 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Pass and enforce the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance Council Members,
For years on a weekly basis I run, walk and cycle along Delaware Ave, Natural Bridges Dr, and Old Mission St. I see the trash, disarray, human difficulties, and environmental degradation multiple times per week.

Sometimes the sheer volume of junk strewn around is shocking.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

I am for strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, and provisions for SCPD to enforce this ordinance. The City really needs to get control this issue. Also, pursuing the potential for the City to offer safe parking areas seems like a reasonable part of the solution to investigate.

Sincerely,
Bruce Dykaar

31.620 1.539
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Rick McCann <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 6:51 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Judith McCann
Property Owner
P.S. Oversized vehicles left parked on city streets are not only an eye sore but they take up parking spots for tourists &
residents alike. It affects the retail stores, restaurants & entertainment venues. They're a blight on the city since
trash accumulates. Residents have no room to space out their green waste, garbage & recycle containers.

31.621 1.540
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bonnie Faraola <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 7:38 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
B Faraola

31.622 1.541
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Carla Kramer <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 9:01 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I vehemently support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance Council Members,<BR><BR>I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.  <BR><BR>I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.<BR><BR>Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

PLEASE HEAR OUR VOICES!
We are the property owners of Santa Cruz!
Carla Kramer
2395 Delaware #75
Santa Cruz
Sent from my iPhone

31.623 1.542
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: PAUL RISCHE <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 5:45 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members, I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses. I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff. Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance. Sincerely,

Paul Rische
Beach Hill resident

31.624 1.543
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Gordon Ross <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 9:12 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members, I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses. I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff. Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance. Sincerely,
Gordon Ross

31.625 1.544
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: shawn <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 9:23 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Support: Oversized Vehicles Ordinance
Hello - I support the Oversized Vehicles ordinance being proposed. The growing number of oversized vehicles in town and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses cannot be tolerated any longer.

Years ago, our neighbors worked with the city to add permit parking on our street and the adjacent side street. We had been experiencing a constant influx of RV dwellers who stayed for weeks at a time, and the problem had been growing in scale for years. I believe the RVs are often the source of the drugs and so day after day, week after week, we had more crime, more trash, more incidents involving mentally unstable and addicted individuals in front of our homes and in our yards. The city installed the parking signs, and the problem disappeared overnight. It works, please implement this same simple approach city-wide.

I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Oversized Vehicles on all city streets and public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance. I like that this ordinance sets up safe parking lots and the concept of emergency overnight parking. We want to be a compassionate town, this is a compassionate ordinance which sets up boundaries for all.

31.626 1.545
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Dillon Paige <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 9:06 AM
To: City Council; Donna Meyers; Renee Golder; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Sonja Brunner; Justin Cummings; Sandy Brown; Martine Watkins
Subject: Support For Oversided Vehicle Ordinance
Dear City Council,
I am in favor of passing the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance. This problem has impacted the safety of our neighborhoods, the environment, and in the long run does not help people living in their cars. I support the establishment of places on county property where people living in their cars can park overnight safely and receive the services to address what caused them to become homeless in the first place.

Dillon Paige

31.627 1.546
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Robert Stone <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 9:40 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Robert Stone
Bay Street
Santa Cruz

31.628 1.547
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Manuel Prado <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 9:56 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Oversized vehicle ordinance
Hello, I am a business owner, father and homeowner here in Santa Cruz; I am in strong support of the oversized vehicle ordinance you are considering.

Thank you

31.629 1.548
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: jewel auvinen <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 9:32 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members, I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses. I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff. Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.
2 years ago we had a oversized camper like van semi permanent parked near my house & it was not a comfortable situation. Please help home owners & good tenants from having to deal with these squatters.

Thank you for your time and consideration in this matter.

Sincerely,
Jewel Auvinen
Marnell Ave homeowner.

31.630 1.549
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Santa Cruz YIMBY <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 10:20 AM
To: Donna Meyers; Martine Watkins; Justin Cummings; Sonja Brunner; Renee Golder; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Sandy Brown
Cc: City Council
Subject: Comment Letter on Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Attachments: Santa Cruz YIMBY RV Ordinance Letter.pdf
Dear City Council Members,
Please see the attached comment letter from Santa Cruz YIMBY regarding the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance and Safe Parking Program recommendations.

Thank You,
Santa Cruz YIMBY

31.631 1.550
October 25, 2021
Dear Santa Cruz City Council,
Santa Cruz YIMBY seeks to build a community where our neighbors of all ages, cultures, and incomes, can make Santa Cruz County their home. In response to the ever-increasing cost of living, we advocate for more affordable housing to meet the needs of our growing population. Santa Cruz County has a staggering shortage of housing; it's devastating our workforce, causing homelessness to skyrocket, and exacerbating our climate crisis.

We write to respectf ully oppose the Oversize Vehicle Ordinance as proposed by the council subcommittee, however Santa Cruz YIMBY supports the recommendations that commit the city to create additional safe parking program capacity within the city limits. Safe parking programs help provide the stability and support people need in their lives to plan for the future, to access resources, and ultimately, to become housed.

We also support the recommendation to establish f unding for vehicle repairs and registrations. These are cost-effective, humane approaches to triaging a housing and shelter crisis that will reduce conflicts with housed neighbors and improve the quality of life of everyone in our community. While we also support the proposed sewage dumping voucher program, we note that there are no sewage dumping stations within the city limits of Santa Cruz. The closest sewage dumping location at the 76 gas station near Dominican Hospital cannot accommodate larger vehicles, and the sewage dumping station at New Brighton State Beach requires a credit card and park admission ($20) which does not seem compatible with the proposed voucher program. For these reasons we also encourage the city to implement the CACH recommendation of developing a sewage dumping station within the city limits.

As written, the Oversize Vehicle Ordinance provides no options for many people who live in their vehicles to legally park on public streets in the city limits. The practical effect of this ordinance will be an increase in the number of parking citations and towed vehicles, and a corresponding increase in the number of people sleeping in tents, alleys, and doorways when the city takes away the only meager shelter people have. We agree with the Santa Cruz Sentinel Editorial Board when, on October 1, they wrote, “Towing vehicles parked on residential streets will just put more people on the streets, often in dangerous situations including unsanctioned camps, and further stress public health services, not to mention cops who already have their hands full dealing with the myriad problems of local homeless.” Yes to People, Yes to Housing.

31.632 1.551
We need our city to work to solve problems for our community, but this ordinance only makes solving those problems harder. According to a report by Police Chief Mills given at the last City Council meeting on this topic, the impound area at the Dimeo Lane facility is already at capacity with towed vehicles; not only is this policy needlessly cruel, and counter-productive, it’s also unworkable.

A Santa Cruz Sentinel article published on September 15th entitled, “Police amp up ticketing vehicles — shelter options scarce for Santa Cruz unhoused” highlights just how regressive enforcement-based ‘solutions’ to problematic vehicle dwelling can be. The reporter interviewed a man named Daniel, born and raised in Santa Cruz, who had been living in his vehicle on the streets of Santa Cruz after being displaced from the property where he lived in Boulder Creek during the CZU Complex fires. When his vehicle was towed during a city crackdown, he lost access to the work tools that were stored in his vehicle, and his means of dignified employment. Daniel is quoted as saying, “I do have everything to lose, I have no criminal record, I have no health issues but this is causing me to have some serious mental issues...From this point forward, I don’t know what to do. I’ve just been falling through the cracks ever since the fire.” Instead of making it illegal for our vehicle-dwelling unhoused neighbors like Daniel to remain in their vehicles, we need to be offering solutions that provide stability, and pathways towards permanent housing.

A news article published by Lookout on September 22nd, tells the story of 68-year old retired engineer Ron, who has been living in an RV since 2016 when he lost his home in Ben Lomond. “He bought an RV to live in, thinking it would be temporary, but even with a Section 8 housing voucher, he’s been unable to find affordable housing for years.” Many of the people who live in vehicles in our community are refugees from the housing crisis like Ron with deep roots in our community. Yet if our city implements the proposed Oversize Vehicle Ordinance, we will be criminalizing people like Ron who are victims of the housing crisis, displacing them from the community they have lived in for decades, forcing them into the elements as the winter rainy season begins, or causing them to compete for the extremely limited number of indoor shelter beds with the folks who don’t have the option of living in their RVs..

The long-term solution to housing insecurity and homelessness is more housing for everyone who needs it. Housing is a human right. The housing crisis is the foundational problem from which many of our most challenging issues stem. Housing is healthcare. Our city has a “Health In All Policies” mandate--this might as well be a “Housing In All Policies” mandate. As elected council members of a city in California, you in-fact wield significant power to address the housing shortage, because you have significant discretion over land-use in your jurisdiction. We note your record of failing to approve housing projects such as 101 Felix Street and 831 Water Street which would bring a significant number Yes to People, Yes to Housing.

31.633 1.552
of new affordable homes to our city. 831 Water Street is a proposal that includes 140 affordable and moderate income homes, with 54 project based vouchers for people with disabilities, transition age youth, and veterans: many of those units could house people who will otherwise be filling our shelter beds or sleeping in their vehicles. By failing to approve these projects, you are contributing to our housing and homelessness crisis. You can plan for more affordable housing. In-fact, the state requires you to plan for more housing. You can be bold leaders by planning for and approving even more affordable housing than the state requires of you. You only need the will to do so.

Thank you,
Santa Cruz YIMBY Leads
Diana Alfaro
Elizabeth Conlan
Henry Hooker
Kyle Kelley
Janine Roeth
Rafa Sonnenfeld
Yes to People, Yes to Housing.

31.634 1.553
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: James Olson <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 10:44 AM
To: City Council
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Vote yes on the oversized vehicle ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Please do whatever you can to pass this ordinance.

Thank you,
Jim Olson,
202 Anita Street
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
(831) 234-7825

31.635 1.554
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Robert Norse <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 11:33 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Concerns Opposing the Post-Midnight Ban on "Oversized" Vehicles To the Santa Cruz City Council,
Re: Item #25 on the  Afternoon Agenda of the October 26, 2021 City Council meeting HUFF (Homeless United for Friendship & Freedom) opposes the proposed ban on "oversized vehicle" parking city‐wide during the nighttime hours of midnight to 5 PM.

A similar law passed in 2015 banning RV's at night was successfully appealed to the broader Coastal Commission which ruled overwhelmingly that the ordinance presented "substantial" issues and city authorities have not addressed those issues (as evidenced as well by the fact that the they never returned to the Coastal Commission).   Since a significant portion of the City lies within the Coastal zone, those pressing this law would have to show substantial changes in storage and crime justification have happened.   They have not.  Until that happens, passage and enforcement of this law will be costly and futile.  HUFF will again appeal this law if it is passed in its current form.

It limits public access unnecessarily to the Coastal Zone when there are (a) no adequate parking facilities for such vehicles, and  (b) no evidence of a real "crime" problem connected with those vehicles.

It discriminates against poor people (and indeed anyone) who live in or drive the vehicles by denying them coastal access.

It puts a particular burden on those whose only affordable housing is a vehicle by making it illegal to park them at night city‐wide.

The lack of specific provision for shelter and storage for unhoused people as supposedly mandated in the CSSO law has not been fulfilled.  Nor are there any specific provisions for providing survival parking spaces for the vehicles to be criminalized at night.

City authorities posting signs and banning parking in coastal zones during the last few years have been in violation of the Coastal Commission's requirements and will be doubling down on the violations if this ordinance is passed.

It is particularly inappropriate during a pandemic, endangering both those whose only shelter are their vehicles as well as the broader community.

It discriminates against unhoused people by denying them the ability to apply for a permit, with its definition of "residents" as  those who "customarily reside and maintain a place of abode with a street address number in the City of Santa Cruz or who own land withn the City of Santa Cruz..." This excludes hundreds of unhoused people.

31.636 1.555
2 It was done with no determination of its impact on those living in their vehicles in the City and threatens their health and safety.

It is especially cruel and abusive considering the acknowledged shelter crisis.

Its provisions for Safe Parking spaces at night, do not currently exist and there are no plans for providing them.

It prejudices the right to travel, by eliminating the right to park a 20' long vehicle in Santa Cruz for those visiting.

It was passed without meaningful police documentation of the alleged problems justifying the unusual exclusionary policy‐‐there is no documentation of nighttime "crimes".

It is being done without a procedure for consulting the neighborhoods involved as is the accepted practice for requiring permits to park in other cities (as well as in Santa Cruz for vehicles generally).

Santa Cruz' acknowledged and acute housing and storage crisis‐‐going into winter a particular burden for those outside‐‐will only be aggravated by empowering the seizure and towing of vehicles.

The law further privatizes and monetizes public parking space, already at a premium.

The number of permits allowed per year and the short periods they cover do not allow for adequate family and friend visitation for residents.

The staff has presented no survey indicating an actual public health and safety problem.  Calls for service and technical code violations do not amount to actual crimes or conditions that require correction.

In addition given the infirmities in the proposed law (even as amended to limit the time of the parking bans), it will‐‐when rejected by the Coastal Commission‐‐put an undue burden on those whose homes and property is on the Coastal zone if the city chooses to authorize enforcement of the non‐Coastal areas.

Please send this law back to the appropriate Commission or City Council committee for more public input with the individuals seriously affected (poor people who live in their vans, homeless service providers, tourists who visit the city, renters and residents who have friends whose home is their oversized vehicle).

Please request specific documentation on the abuses real and alleged that supposedly motivate this law to examine their exact extent in the last year to determine specific remedies rather than this overly broad attack that hurts poor and homeless people particularly. And shames our community generally.

Thanks,
Robert Norse
Homeless United for Friendship & Freedom

31.637 1.556
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Ark Animal Hospital <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 10:12 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Overnight parking/homeless
Hello,
I'd like to share some of the challenges of being a business owner here on the westside of Santa Cruz, we are located on Mission Street frontage road near the old Wrigley's plant.

Just in the past 1 1/2 years we've had several incidences of vandalism and theft, just after the shelter in place occured we had 2 incidences of break in and theft, shortly after that we had someone break through on of our skylights to gain entry to the hospital, the police came and abducted that individual.

In the past 6 months, we had one of the parked motor homes stay for at least 2 weeks rebuilding their home even after being reported of extended stay take our locked dumpster during the night prior to out pick up day, break the lock off and fill the container, then return it to the curb.  I have video of the container being in place at 3:00am then gone at 4:00am, then back in the morning when I came to work filled with construction waste.

Our customers remark daily of the mess they are leaving along the street and the sidewalks.

I am especially concerned for pedestrians and the kids at PCS high school who will have to step off the curb and into the street to avoid the people and mess that are occupying the sidewalks along their vehicles.

I have to escort my female employees nightly to their cars as they are in fear of harm.

If any questions or more input, please don't hesitate to contact me.

Regards,
‐‐
Darren Lam
Ark Animal Hospital
2616 Mission Street
Santa Cruz, CA  95060
831.426.3399

31.638 1.557
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: David Wood <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 10:13 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Dear City Council, I am pleased that you are improving the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance to address the RVs parking around the city overnight.

RVs occasionally park near an Elementary School by my house which is inappropriate as children are dropped off to attend class and often have to walk through trash that is discarded by these particular vehicles.

Creating space for people to park as necessary seems like a good idea to help those in need.

Please pass an ordinance that will work with the city and the Coastal Commission and one SCPD will enforce. Regards, David Wood

31.639 1.558
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Elise Hughes <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 10:27 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
As per my prior letters of support...

I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,

31.640 1.559
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Andrew Crocker <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 10:33 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
We understand there are some honest, out-of-luck people finding themselves living out of their car, but unfortunately there are also many others doing so outside of the law, praying on neighborhood properties, and not caring about the safety and sanitation of the areas they park their vehicles around. We have seen feces and loads of garbage strewn in Natural Bridges next to where they park.

I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,

31.641 1.560
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Helene Scott <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 10:35 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Vote yes on the oversized vehicle ordinance
Dear Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

It saddens me that I avoid certain areas due to this situation.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Thank you all so very much for all your hard work and dedication! Sincerely,
Hélène Scott

31.642 1.561
2 31.643 1.562
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Nanette Poore <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 10:36 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,

31.644 1.563
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Gabrielle Diane Laney-Andrews <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 10:38 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

We too have had Oversized Vehicles camping in front of our home. Our visitors have no where to park and also we see dumping of waste materials on our street that is clearly marked that all liquids from the curb flow into the ocean. It truly is an environmental crisis.

Sincerely,
Gabrielle D. Laney-Andrews
316 Grant St
Santa Cruz, 95060
[email protected]

31.645 1.564
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Justin McNabb <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 10:40 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Justin McNabb

31.646 1.565
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Michael Keane <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 10:40 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Oversized vehicle parking ordinance
Council Members,
I live on the Westside near swift and Delaware and have become more and more concerned about the number of camper vehicles being established in the area and leading up mission extension drive.

The city and its citizens really need a solution to have a clear designated parking area and those that don’t comply should not be allowed to camp elsewhere. I am concerned about the growing environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses. I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Best regards
Michael K

31.647 1.566
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: SILVIA GRASSETTI-KRUGLIKOV <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 10:42 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Dear Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, increased garbage on our streets and crime in our neighborhoods. Santa Cruz is such a beautiful city, but these vehicles detract from that beauty. I support your efforts to pass the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff. Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Silvia Grassetti-Kruglikov
Santa Cruz homeowner

31.648 1.567
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: laura rose <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 10:42 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Laura Rosensteel

31.649 1.568
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Diana Magor <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 10:43 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members, I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses. I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff. Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance. Sincerely,
Diana Magor,
Westside resident and homeowner.
--
Diana Magor
[email protected]
831-429-5424
831-818-9915 cell

31.650 1.569
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Nancy Maynard <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 10:43 AM
To: City Council
Subject: No to parking .. Isupport the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Nancy Maynard

31.651 1.570
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Claudia Kemper <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 10:47 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Claudia

31.652 1.571
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Edmundo Costa <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 10:49 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Oversized Vehicle Ordinance Support
Council Members,
I am a long time resident on the WestSide of Santa Cruz. I frequently bike through the industrial park on the West Side and I see Oversized Vehicles and the environmental damage.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Edmundo Costa
610 Spring St.

Santa Cruz, CA 95060
Cel: 831-212-6703

31.653 1.572
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Simone Young <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 10:49 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,<BR><BR>I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.  <BR><BR>I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.<BR><BR>Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.<BR><BR>Sincerely,<BR><BR> I work on Mission Ext on the Westside and the RV parking is out of control. I often fear for my safety when I arrive early. The mammoth amount of trash disposed of on our streets is unbelievable and out of control. It’s disheartening to see such filth in our beautiful neighborhoods. Unfortunately, there on Mission Ext there is a feeder creek that the homeless use as a disposal site and this feeder creek heads straight out to the ocean. We can’t have this for the health of our local waters snd those who work and play in our ocean.

Please! Something has to happen.

Thank you,
Simone Young

31.654 1.573
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Colleen Sullivan <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 10:50 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am deeply dismayed about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses. Our beautiful city has become a destination for increasing numbers of people living in their RV's in part because of our known progressive tolerance.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Colleen Sullivan

31.655 1.574
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: scott smith <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 10:53 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Vote yes on the oversized vehicle ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Scott Smith
DE Anza Park resident

31.656 1.575
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: marci clow <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 10:54 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
Writing another letter to city council about RVs and the disrespect of their occupants for our city, feels like beating a dead horse. But the environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses is so out of hand that here I go again begging you to do anything within your power to make some changes. I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration and would like to see strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

While you are at it, the daunting amount of occupants on the levy and in the park is horrendous. I plead with you to work with the county and state to take action and come up with a sustainable plan to keep our city clean, provide a place for these people to go and services to make them contribute more to our community than their current contribution of trash, needles, human waste, and fear to our law-abiding and tax-paying citizens. Martin vs. Boise is supposed to be about not citing individuals for sleeping outdoors when no shelter is available, not about the out-of-hand lawlessness that seems to be occurring in our community.

Regards,
Marci Clow
Westside Resident

31.657 1.576
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Anne Scholz <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 10:54 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Member,
I work on the lower Westside Delaware. We are a start up Biotec company trying to grow and stay in Santa Cruz. The RV have caused us several problems including noise from their generators, trash and human waste. I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.  I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff. Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Anne Scholz

31.658 1.577
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Wubel Webeshete <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 11:16 AM
To: City Council
Cc: Martine Watkins; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Renee Golder; Donna Meyers; Justin Cummings; Sandy Brown; Sonja Brunner; Lee Butler; Andrew Mills; Larry Imwalle Subject: Vote NO on Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Dear Council,
The proposed Oversized Vehicles Ordinance (OVO) is unresearched, counterproductive, and unacceptable.

At the September 21, 2021 council meeting, we learned that the goal of OVO is to give police enhanced tools to “move vehicles along”. According to the City Attorney, enforcing current environmental and nuisance laws is ineffectual. He said, “just writing a citation, even if it’s a misdemeanor, even if you could arrest someone and take them into custody, the way the court process works these days, they would be right back out on the street within an hour and go back to a parked RV and continue to engage in the conduct we’re trying to address”. It seems that instead of acknowledging that ticketing, towing, and writing misdemeanors are not an effective way of managing homelessness (as supported by decades of research), the city will double down and create a new tool to incarcerate people who cannot afford to comply with the OVO, all while not significantly providing resources that would help people to avoid engaging in so-called “nuisance behaviors”. Many of these “nuisance behaviors” are acts of survival by our marginalized neighbors who have been abandoned by the city. The repeated reference to the need to address health and safety concerns, without acknowledging that the health and safety of people sleeping in vehicles for survival is severely impacted by removing their shelter is disgusting and clearly in opposition with Health In All Policies.

The proposed solution, as outlined by Mills, is that OVO will allow the city to cite misdemeanor infractions, take an individual into custody, have the city attorney prosecute the individual, levy fines on a person living in poverty, and then tow their vehicle when they are unable to comply. Additionally, Andy Mills disclosed that towing is incredibly resource intensive and expensive and that the city has had to create a brand new tow-yard in order to accommodate the RVs and vehicles seized during “Operation Westside Story”. Even more money and resources will be spent fighting lawsuits that challenge the constitutionality of OVO and appealing to the coastal commission, who called the last version of ordinance “onerous,” “drastic” and “draconian” I am outraged that city resources will be used to create more unsheltered homelessness and deepen cycles of poverty.

Those very same city resources should be used for productive solutions that use city property for safe sleeping programs, help vehicles get registered, provide free sanitary methods for grey water disposal, and provide more refuse services (all services that would be of benefit to all community members).

The bottom line is people have nowhere else to go. It is not enough to include vague mention of safe sleeping programs while prioritizing criminalization of our most vulnerable neighbors. The Affiliated Faith Community (AFC) has been operating its SafeSpaces Parking Program for years and it is currently the ONLY resource being offered when police force people to move their vehicles under threat of ticketing and misdemeanors. They are required by law to provide a safe place to sleep when they displace someone from their survival shelter; however, as program director, Reverend Joseph Jacobs, shared at the city council meeting a month ago: Despite this reliance on referral to AFC (who operates 41 overnight parking spaces), the city has *never* funded their services and, recently, even refused to financially support expansion. Instead, these programs have been mentioned only as an afterthought, despite being proven to provide stability and bolster the ability to transition

31.659 1.578
2 to housing, in addition to offering a more dignified survival option to being unsheltered. The city continues to be disingenuous about their support of existing programs and there are simply not enough alternative shelters and housing available.

We need action that prioritizes listening to and coordinating with experts: our houseless community, community advocates and service providers, researchers who study houselessness, and the County Health and Human Service Departments.

We demand services without the threat of criminalization! Do not allow OVO to become policy! Thank you,
Wubel Webeshete

31.660 1.579
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Peter Gelblum <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 11:31 AM
To: City Council; Bonnie Bush; Donna Meyers; Tony Condotti ([email protected]); Justin Cummings; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Sonja Brunner; Sandy Brown; Renee Golder; Martine Watkins
Subject: Item 25 on Agenda for 10/26/21 City Council Meeting (Oversize Vehicles) Dear Council Members and City Attorney:

I write to oppose the proposed ordinance. If enacted,it will make it literally impossible for most people who are forced to live in their vehicles to stay in Santa Cruz. I believe that is the goal of the ordinance, and that many people would be happy with that result. That is not an acceptable goal, however, from both a legal and moral standpoint.

SCPD's own Facebook posts make clear that the vehicles that have been towed recently have been towed for economic reasons, primarily failure to pay tickets and/or to timely register the vehicles. The people who live in the vehicles do so because they cannot afford to live anywhere else, and they cannot afford to pay the tickets or register the vehicles.

Both the emails supporting the proposed ordinance,and the staff report accompanying the proposed ordinance focus on complaints about trash, waste, discharge of fluids, needles, etc. There are existing laws that prohibit that behavior, and this new proposed ordinance adds language specifically about those issues. That's all you need, and to enforce the existing laws. The almost complete ban on parking RVs on the City streets proposed by this ordinance is unnecessary, overkill, draconian, and cruel, and will almost certainly invite litigation that has confronted other cities in the area who try to enact similar bans. The proposed ordinance will also almost certainly run afoul of the Coastal Commission, as did the previous RV ordinance, still on appeal with the Coastal Commission.

Moreover, the staff report seems slanted, with staff looking for data to support the conclusion staff and the Council majority desire. However, in several cases, the evidence cited by the report does not say what staff says it says or support the statements in the staff report. A couple examples:
 " In calendar year 2020 and in the first eight months of 2021, the Santa Cruz Fire Department reported 38 fire incidents that are vehicle related, three that were specifically related to oversized vehicles." (Emphasis added) What is the relevance of the other 35 indicents? Three incidents in 20 months does not constitute a big problem.
 " A pilot parking study was conducted using the city’s Smart City Sensor located at the Cowell overview parking lot, and showed that fewer than 6% of vehicles were blocking access for almost 30% of all parking spaces (see Attachment 4), with some of those vehicles being oversized vehicles." (Emphasis added) How many is "some"? In fact, the attachment does not provide any information about the types of vehicles blocking access, and therefore does not support the staff report.  " Additionally, vehicle abatement activities have continued over the years. According to the Vehicle Abatement Officer, in the calendar year 2020, 2,243 abatement notices were issued, 197 vehicles were towed, including 20 which were oversized vehicles or camper vans. Attachment 3 provides additional vehicle abatement information including recent heat map data and graphs of frequency and locations of vehicle abatement activities. As the graph demonstrates, various parts of the city are disproportionately impacted. The five streets with the most vehicle abatement activity (Delaware, Natural Bridges, Shaffer,

31.661 1.580
2 Mission, and Almar) were all on the West Side, and approximately one third of the abatements citywide are focused on the far West Side." In fact, Attachment 3 says nothing about the types of vehicles that were subject to abatement notices and. therefore, again fails to support the staff report.

I might feel differently if the City had a place or places for people living in their vehicles to park all day and night (unlike the current AFC program), and that does not require residents to cross impossible financial hurdles (also unlike the AFC program.) But there is no such program, and the proposed ordinance does not envision such a program.

I appreciate the effort that has gone into this, but I urge you to go back to the drawing board and try again. The next version should include practical provisions that will allow people who cannot afford to live anywhere than their vehicles a real alternative to sleeping on the street.

Peter Gelblum

31.662 1.581
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Kim Keane <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 10:55 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Vote yes on the oversized vehicle ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.  I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff. Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.Sincerely, Kimberly Keane

31.663 1.582
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Don Roland <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 10:56 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Support for Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
I’m writing today asking that you support the proposed Oversized Vehicle Ordinance.

As a longtime lower Westside resident, it’s discouraging to see the blight and associated negative behaviors that too often go hand in hand with unregulated oversized vehicle camping. Status quo is not compassionate for the people who live in oversized vehicles. It’s not compassionate for housed residents that have to deal with the associated negative behaviors. And while it may be a city‐wide problem, it’s not fair to burden my neighborhood with a disproportionate amount of the burden.

I’m asking you to exhibit leadership on this important safety and quality of life issue.

Don Roland
Lower Westside

31.664 1.583
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Kevin Vogel <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 10:56 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Agenda Item #25: Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Dear Mayor and Council:

I am in support of the oversized vehicle ordinance under the following conditions:
1) The establishment and enforcement of the provisions of this ordinance shall be independent of the availability of the safe parking program.
2) Residential annual oversized vehicle parking permits shall be limited to one oversized vehicle per address at any given time.
3) Current address of residence shall require supporting documentation issued by a governmental agency.

As always, thank you for your work on this important community issue.

Respectfully,
Kevin Vogel

31.665 1.584
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Polly Malan <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 10:56 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Vote yes on the oversized vehicle ordinance
Council Members,<BR><BR>I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.  <BR><BR>I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.<BR><BR>Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.<BR><BR>Sincerely,<BR> Sent from my iPhone

31.666 1.585
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Julie Hansmann <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 10:57 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses. It has gotten ridiculous, they park at night in areas along West Cliff, and I feel unsafe walking on West Cliff Drive in the morning.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Julie Hansmann
237 Getchell St.

Santa Cruz, CA

31.667 1.586
From: John Harker
To: City Council
Subject: Please pass the oversized vehicle ordinance
Date: Monday, October 25, 2021 10:59:32 AM
I endorse and hope the city council will pass the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance this week. I frequently ride from Santa Cruz to Wilder and see the trash, fires and white and black water from decrepit RVs along the route.

John Harker
Santa Cruz

31.668 1.587
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Anita <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 11:00 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I have visited Many other towns along the California Coast that have signs on most Areas of entrance that State They will not permit large vehicle/ camping or storing of RV’s on their city streets.

Our town should not permit the  growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Anita Strong
Sent from my iPhone

31.669 1.588
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Marshall Keneipp <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 11:00 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Dear Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Marshall Keneipp
424 Caledonia St, Santa Cruz

31.670 1.589
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Philip Mekis <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 11:02 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Please cast a YES vote on the oversized vehicle ordinance Council Members,
I live on the corner of Escalona and Storey. I constantly have oversized vehicles camping along the side of my home. This area is permit controlled but not often patrolled. Lately I have had multiple confrontations with an RV owner who is selling drugs out of his RV and moves around every other day or so. My neighbor has called parking enforcement to try to get additional patrols. The RV owners buyers have gotten into loud verbal confrontations as well, which is concerning to me relative to my and the surrounding neighborhoods safety, which include elderly and families with children. The above mentioned and numerous others leak large amounts of oil typically. Leave their trash in my side yard in large garbage bags and take up needed parking (the reason the block is permitted in the first place). Some oversized vehicles have received tickets however this does not seem to deter them, must be making too much in drug money I would assume.

I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Philip Mekis
126 Storey St

31.671 1.590
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Karen Menehan <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 11:03 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Support for RV parking ban
I'd like to see the Santa Cruz City Council ban RVs from parking overnight on our streets.

Karen Menehan
110 Palo Verde Terrace
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
831‐461‐5124
"Don't ask yourself what the world needs; ask yourself what makes you come alive. And then go and do that.

Because what this world needs is people who have come alive."–Howard Thurman

31.672 1.591
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Kenni Lopes <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 11:04 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,<BR><BR>I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.  <BR><BR>I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.<BR><BR>Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.<BR><BR>Sincerely,<BR><BR> Sent from my iPhone

31.673 1.592
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: victoria covell <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 11:17 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Vote yes on the oversized vehicle ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses. **I have personally witnessed people pooping in the street along side their vans.** I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see **more** strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Victoria Covell
Resident
Sent from my iPhone

31.674 1.593
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Julie Thiebaut <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 11:19 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.  I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sent from my iPad

31.675 1.594
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Elizabeth Burton <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 11:20 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Vote yes on the oversized vehicle ordinance please Dear Council Members,
Thank You for your work on this issue.

I am very concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, fire danger, garbage and discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance. Limit times and require management of public health standards.

Sincerely,
Elizabeth L. Burton

31.676 1.595
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Noah Buchanan <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 11:21 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Vote yes on the oversized vehicle ordinance
Council Members, I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.  I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff. Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Noah Buchanan

31.677 1.596
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Tiffany Helmich <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 11:25 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

I would like some accountability from the police department and city in enforcing the laws too!  There is mounds of trash alongside the RVs and it just sits there!  Why isn't the  trash getting picked up? Why don't we have porta potties for the walking zombies?  Its absolutely disgusting and embarrassing for me to drive down delaware and see all the trash and car campers.  None of these folks are making santa cruz better.  They all are herion/meth addicts that are illegally doing drugs, littering, and stealing.  Hence why they are living in the RV and not at our local shelter.

When will the tax payers of this city matter?
Sincerely,
Tiffany

31.678 1.597
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Richard Schuppek <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 11:26 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Support For Oversided Vehicle Ordinance With Edits Dear City Council Members,
I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance if and only if enforcement of the ordinance is independent of the safe parking program and residential annual oversized parking permits are limited to one (1) per address and require current address documentation.

Sincerely, a concerned parent, resident, and Westside home owner, Richard Schuppek
301 Alta Avenue

31.679 1.598
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Aria DiSalvio <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 11:27 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

I would like my children to feel safe walking and biking around the neighborhoods close to their school (Gateway) and I believe that stricter permitting will help clean up our streets.

Sincerely,
Aria DiSalvio
2820 Smith Grade
Santa Cruz, CA 95060

31.680 1.599
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Mimi Trenholme <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 11:29 AM
To: City Council
Subject: VOTE YES - restrict oversized vehicles on streets Council members:

I’m concerned about the growing number of oversized vehicles parking on our neighborhood and commercial streets, and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste, and increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses. I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration, and would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of recreational vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCpD to effectively  enforce the ordinance.

Sincerely,
Mimi Trenholme

31.681 1.600
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Mark Ligon <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 11:29 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Vote yes on the oversized vehicle ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Mark Ligon
116 Doyle Street
Sent from my iPhone

31.682 1.601
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: jason glickman <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 11:34 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Vote yes on the oversized vehicle ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the increased crime and copious amounts of litter in our neighborhoods and businesses. I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff. Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Jason Glickman

31.683 1.602
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Charlene Clarke & Bill Barnes <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 11:35 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Pass RV Ordinance
Dear Council Members
I urge you to pass (and strengthen if possible) the Oversize Vehicle Ordinance and return upper Delaware, Shaffer and Natural Bridges to the residents who live and pay taxes in Santa Cruz. The environmental damage being done by the occupants of the RV camps is a disgrace. I used to enjoy walking our dog along Antonelli Pond, along the RR tracks then down Shaffer, but the drug use and aggressive behavior of the RV campers is intimidating to say the least.

Thank you,
Bill Barnes
Steamer Lane Cottage
227 Oregon Street
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
[email protected]

31.684 1.603
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Natalya <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 11:36 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am deeply concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Natalya Troyanker

31.685 1.604
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Molly Abramson <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 11:36 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,

31.686 1.605
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bonnie Britton <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 11:36 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Vote yes on the oversized vehicle ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.Sincerely, Bonnie Britton
Sent from my iPhone

31.687 1.606
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: LINDA JENSEN <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 11:36 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Vote yes on the oversized vehicle ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Sent from my iPhone

31.688 1.607
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Elizabeth Plageman <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 11:38 AM
To: City Council
Cc: Mom Plageman
Subject: Support vehicle restrictions
I am in
Strong support of limits for RVs. As a person who lives on Delaware Ave, I am saddened to find cups of pee, waste etc. Every time I drive down Delaware to natural bridges. Please please regulate not only residential but also commercial parking of such oversized vehicles.

These oversized vehicles are harming our neighborhood.

Thanks, Elizabeth Plageman
Sent from my iPhone

31.689 1.608
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Gary <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 11:42 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Dear Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime and drug use n our neighborhoods and businesses.

This necessary and much needed ordinance offers  individuals a safe place to sleep, a useful tool for Police to hold disruptive people accountable, and helps keep our community’s safe. Win,  win  win! It is not only a homeless issue as we also have an epidemic of locals,  tourists,  and out of towns/states  etc. vehicles sleeping outside our and our  children’s windows. NOBODY wats stranger’s living out side their homes, disruptive or otherwise.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Please include ALL size vehicles in t a future no sleeping overnight  ordinance.

It is NOT criminalizing the homeless any more then having to be held accountable for a seatbelt law.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Thank you for all your dedication and hard work keeping our neighborhoods safe and sane! Sincerely, Gary Roe
Sent from Mail for Windows

31.690 1.609
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Reece Reber <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 11:44 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Vote yes on the oversized vehicle ordinance
Council Members,<BR><BR>I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.  <BR><BR>I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.<BR><BR>Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.<BR><BR>Sincerely,<BR> Please take action before it’s too late! Thanks for your consideration.

Sent from my iPhone

31.691 1.610
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: john markytan <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 11:45 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the number of Oversized Vehicles in our neighborhoods.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
John Markytan...40 year resident

31.692 1.611
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Kim Dean <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 11:45 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Kim Dean (local resident)

31.693 1.612
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Robin McDuff <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 11:47 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I do not support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance Council Members,
I really dislike that this ordinance is trying to drive people who can't afford a home out of our town.

They are residents, too.

I do support an ordinance where any oversized vehicle owner can get a permit to park overnight in areas to be determined, with whatever normal strictures re noise, trash, etc. To be qualified, perhaps they should have to show a long-time connection to Santa Cruz - that seems reasonable. If it is parked right by a house, then the ordinance as written is fine, but there are many streets that are not residential which should be approved for people not housed.

As I said in a previous email, I would support it on my street Miramar in the first block. Right now both small and oversized vehicles do park there overnight and create no problem whatsoever. If they do create problems, then you can pull the permit and create appropriate consequences.

The safe parking program is clearly inadequate to the need. If that could be expanded to meet the current need, than this ordinance would make more sense.

Don't drive Santa Cruz residents out of town.

Sincerely,
Robin McDuff

31.694 1.613
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Floyd Williams <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 11:53 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,<BR><BR>I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.  <BR><BR>I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.<BR><BR>Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.<BR><BR>Sincerely,<BR><BR> Sent from my iPhone

31.695 1.614
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Silvia Leon <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 11:56 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Vote yes on the oversized vehicle ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

This is a long over due law that should be taken very seriously.

Santa Cruz as being my hometown has tremendously changed for the worse in the last several years.

Please consider add more stricken laws for oversized vehicles. They should not be parking in our residential or commercial neighborhoods. I witness this all the time in and our the Westside of Santa Cruz where I reside.

Sincerely,
Chica

31.696 1.615
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Elise Williams <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 11:58 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Vote yes on the oversized vehicle ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses. I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff. Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Elise Williams

31.697 1.616
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Terry <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 11:58 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Vote yes on the oversized vehicle ordinance
Council Members, I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses. I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff. Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Terry Spodick
--
Terry Spodick
[email protected]

31.698 1.617
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Rossana Bruni <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 11:59 AM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned for the children who grow up with increased crime in their neighborhood. Santa Cruz is idyllic in many ways, in this regard, it is a diminished city.

I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses. I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff. Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Rossana Bruni
206 Alta Vista Dr
Santa Cruz, CA

31.699 1.618
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 11:59 AM
To: City Council
Subject: RV Legislation Support.....

Dear Council,

I would like to announce my support for the legislation restricting RV/ large vehicle parking. My property on the corner of Clay St. has been abused many times by those that often park RV's in front of my property restricting normal parking access for my tenants. The next step has been on multiple occasions....these individuals then using the grassy area between my property and my next door neighbor....as a latrine.

These vehicles often are an attractive nuisance and if the city wants to offer up some parking lots that they own and charge fees and/ or monitor these lots, I'm more ok with that but indiscriminate neighborhood street parking by these vehicles has no upside for neighbors or neighborhoods.

Regards,

Gary Whitney, owner

113‐115 Clay St.
325 Barson St

31.700 1.619
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Sophia Bassett <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 12:03 PM
To: City Council
Cc: Martine Watkins; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Renee Golder; Justin Cummings; Sandy Brown; Sonja Brunner; Donna Meyers; Lee Butler; Andrew Mills Subject: Vote No on the Dehumanizing OVO
Dear Council,
The proposed Oversized Vehicles Ordinance (OVO) is unresearched, counterproductive, and unacceptable.

At the September 21, 2021 council meeting, we learned that the goal of OVO is to give police enhanced tools to “move vehicles along”.

According to the City Attorney, enforcing current environmental and nuisance laws is ineffectual. He said, “just writing a citation, even if it’s a misdemeanor, even if you could arrest someone and take them into custody, the way the court process works these days, they would be right back out on the street within an hour and go back to a parked RV and continue to engage in the conduct we’re trying to address”. It seems that instead of acknowledging that ticketing, towing, and writing misdemeanors are not an effective way of managing homelessness (as supported by decades of research), the city will double down and create a new tool to incarcerate people who cannot afford to comply with the OVO, all while not significantly providing resources that would help people to avoid engaging in so-called “nuisance behaviors”. Many of these “nuisance behaviors” are acts of survival by our marginalized neighbors who have been abandoned by the city. The repeated reference to the need to address health and safety concerns, without acknowledging that the health and safety of people sleeping in vehicles for survival is severely impacted by removing their shelter is disgusting and clearly in opposition with Health In All Policies.

The proposed solution, as outlined by Mills, is that OVO will allow the city to cite misdemeanor infractions, take an individual into custody, have the city attorney prosecute the individual, levy fines on a person living in poverty, and then tow their vehicle when they are unable to comply. Additionally, Andy Mills disclosed that towing is incredibly resource intensive and expensive and that the city has had to create a brand new tow-yard in order to accommodate the RVs and vehicles seized during “Operation Westside Story”. Even more money and resources will be spent fighting lawsuits that challenge the constitutionality of OVO and appealing to the coastal commission, who called the last version of ordinance “onerous,” “drastic” and “draconian” I am outraged that city resources will be used to create more unsheltered homelessness and deepen cycles of poverty. Those very same city resources should be used for productive solutions that use city property for safe sleeping programs, help vehicles get registered, provide free sanitary methods for grey water disposal, and provide more refuse services (all services that would be of benefit to all community members).

The bottom line is people have nowhere else to go. It is not enough to include vague mention of safe sleeping programs while prioritizing criminalization of our most vulnerable neighbors. The Affiliated Faith Community (AFC) has been operating its SafeSpaces Parking Program for years and it is currently the ONLY resource being offered when police force people to move their vehicles under threat of ticketing and misdemeanors. They are required by law to provide a safe place to sleep when they displace someone from their survival shelter; however, as program director, Reverend Joseph Jacobs, shared at the city council meeting a month ago: Despite this reliance on referral to AFC (who operates 41 overnight parking spaces), the city has *never* funded their services and, recently, even refused to financially support expansion. Instead, these programs have been mentioned only as an afterthought, despite being proven to provide stability and bolster the ability to transition to housing, in addition to offering a more dignified survival option to being unsheltered. The city continues to be disingenuous about their support of existing programs and there are simply not enough alternative shelters and housing available.

We need action that prioritizes listening to and coordinating with experts: our houseless community, community advocates and service providers, researchers who study houselessness, and the County Health and Human Service Departments.

We demand services without the threat of criminalization! Do not allow OVO to become policy! Thank you,
Sophia Bassett

31.701 1.620
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Madeline Thompson <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 12:55 PM
To: City Council
Cc: Martine Watkins; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Renee Golder; Donna Meyers; Justin Cummings; Sandy Brown; Sonja Brunner; Lee Butler; Andrew Mills; Larry Imwalle Subject: Vote NO on Oversized Vehicle Ordinance please! Dear Council,
The proposed Oversized Vehicles Ordinance (OVO) is unresearched, counterproductive, and unacceptable.

At the September 21, 2021 council meeting, we learned that the goal of OVO is to give police enhanced tools to “move vehicles along”. According to the City Attorney, enforcing current environmental and nuisance laws is ineffectual. He said, “just writing a citation, even if it’s a misdemeanor, even if you could arrest someone and take them into custody, the way the court process works these days, they would be right back out on the street within an hour and go back to a parked RV and continue to engage in the conduct we’re trying to address”. It seems that instead of acknowledging that ticketing, towing, and writing misdemeanors are not an effective way of managing homelessness (as supported by decades of research), the city will double down and create a new tool to incarcerate people who cannot afford to comply with the OVO, all while not significantly providing resources that would help people to avoid engaging in so-called “nuisance behaviors”. Many of these “nuisance behaviors” are acts of survival by our marginalized neighbors who have been abandoned by the city. The repeated reference to the need to address health and safety concerns, without acknowledging that the health and safety of people sleeping in vehicles for survival is severely impacted by removing their shelter is disgusting and clearly in opposition with Health In All Policies.

The proposed solution, as outlined by Mills, is that OVO will allow the city to cite misdemeanor infractions, take an individual into custody, have the city attorney prosecute the individual, levy fines on a person living in poverty, and then tow their vehicle when they are unable to comply. Additionally, Andy Mills disclosed that towing is incredibly resource intensive and expensive and that the city has had to create a brand new tow-yard in order to accommodate the RVs and vehicles seized during “Operation Westside Story”. Even more money and resources will be spent fighting lawsuits that challenge the constitutionality of OVO and appealing to the coastal commission, who called the last version of ordinance “onerous,” “drastic” and “draconian” I am outraged that city resources will be used to create more unsheltered homelessness and deepen cycles of poverty.

Those very same city resources should be used for productive solutions that use city property for safe sleeping programs, help vehicles get registered, provide free sanitary methods for grey water disposal, and provide more refuse services (all services that would be of benefit to all community members).

The bottom line is people have nowhere else to go. It is not enough to include vague mention of safe sleeping programs while prioritizing criminalization of our most vulnerable neighbors. The Affiliated Faith Community (AFC) has been operating its SafeSpaces Parking Program for years and it is currently the ONLY resource being offered when police force people to move their vehicles under threat of ticketing and misdemeanors. They are required by law to provide a safe place to sleep when they displace someone from their survival shelter; however, as program director, Reverend Joseph Jacobs, shared at the city council meeting a month ago: Despite this reliance on referral to AFC (who operates 41 overnight parking spaces), the city has *never* funded their services and, recently, even refused to financially support expansion. Instead, these programs have been mentioned only as an afterthought, despite being proven to provide stability and bolster the ability to transition

31.702 1.621
2 to housing, in addition to offering a more dignified survival option to being unsheltered. The city continues to be disingenuous about their support of existing programs and there are simply not enough alternative shelters and housing available.

We need action that prioritizes listening to and coordinating with experts: our houseless community, community advocates and service providers, researchers who study houselessness, and the County Health and Human Service Departments.

We demand services without the threat of criminalization! Do not allow OVO to become policy! Thank you,
Madeline Thompson

31.703 1.622
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: shawn medved <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 12:00 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Vote yes on the oversized vehicle ordinance
Council Members, PLEASE Clean up Santa Cruz!
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Shawn Medved

31.704 1.623
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bob Lamonica <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 12:06 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Bob Lamonica

31.705 1.624
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Ken. Annouschka Collins <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 12:07 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance. Hopefully this will also help with the endless amounts of garbage left behind.

Sincerely,
Ken Collins

31.706 1.625
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Annouschka Collins <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 12:07 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Annouschka Collins

31.707 1.626
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Donna Karolchik <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 12:12 PM
To: City Council
Subject: vote yes on oversized vehicle ordinance
Thank you for your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff. I wholeheartedly support more strict permitting for temporary parking of RVs on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

I frequently walk my dog at Natural Bridges SP and Antonelli Pond, and am dismayed at the mess that has resulted from the many RVs and other inhabited vehicles parked along the streets in that area. It often feels like a health hazard walking on the streets where these vehicles are parked because of the trash and sewage. If we are going to allow these vehicles to park in our town, it should be in a designated area away from city streets and residential neighborhoods, and such a parking area must have enforced rules that prohibit the dumping of trash and human waste.

Sincerely,
-Donna Karolchik

31.708 1.627
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Carol Olson <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 12:16 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses. Santa Cruz is being significantly and negatively impacted by these vehicles. The problem is increasing and hurting our citizens.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Carol A. Olson
837 California St, Santa Cruz, CA 95060

31.709 1.628
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Cliff Bixler <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 12:18 PM
To: City Council
Subject: RV Ordinance
I support the proposed RV Ordinance. It is past time to address this problem. I have personally witnessed auto work going on with fluids leaking into storm drains, disabled vehicles, human waste being dumped and trash being left on streets from RV and car campers. If you are going to allow sleeping in vehicles it needs to be organized and confined to somewhere that will attenuate environmental damage and not be in residential areas.

Cliff Bixler

31.710 1.629
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: don_hill_1 <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 12:18 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Dear Council Members,
I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff. Public streets and right-of-way should not be used for private camping. Your Council is aware of the concerns with safety, sanitation, and liability.

For the ordinance I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone

31.711 1.630
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: oldest, the one who went to ong Kong <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 12:21 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members, I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses. I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff. Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance. Sincerely, Please, at least keep campers and people sleeping in cars away from any RESIDENTIAL AREAS, hard working tax payers need to be able to sleep and feel safe in their own home. A.K.

31.712 1.631
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Eaton, Matt <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 12:23 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members, I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.  As a business owner and land owner in Santa Cruz, I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff. Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Matthew Eaton
Sent from my iPhone

31.713 1.632
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: TOM VLASSIS <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 12:24 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I do not support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance Council Members, I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses. As currently written, I do not support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I feel the Ordinance should contain:
1) All Recreational Vehicles are required to have a temporary parking permit if they are parked on a city street more than 24 hours.
2) No more than one temporary parking permit for a Recreational Vehicle is allowed to be issued to a residence/business.
3) No temporary parking permits shall be issued in R15 zoned areas. 4) All Recreation Vehicles must be currently licensed and registered per the Calif. Vehicle Code regulations.
5) Strict enforcement by SCPD and City Parking Control jointly effectively enforce this ordinance.

Respectfully,
Tom Vlassis
101 Heath St.

Santa Cruz, CA 95060

31.714 1.633
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Kara Cadagan <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 12:27 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Dear Santa Cruz City Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses. I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff. Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Thank you,
Kara Cadagan
Manor Ave

31.715 1.634
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Garrett Schwegler <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 12:28 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Vote yes on the oversized vehicle ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Garrett Schwegler

31.716 1.635
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Drew Meyer <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 12:38 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members, I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses. I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Drew Meyer

31.717 1.636
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: . Gerardo Kvaternik <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 12:41 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Yes! on Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Dear Council Members,
I support your efforts on the oversized vehicle ordinance currently under consideration by the council and city staff.

Sincerely,
G. Kvaternik
The content of this email is confidential and intended for the recipient(s) only.  Please do not share the email addresses specified above with any person, website or web service without a written consent of the owner.

31.718 1.637
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Anne Friscia <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 12:43 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Please vote yes on the oversized vehicle ordinance Dear Council Members,
Please vote yes on the oversized vehicle ordinance. I am a resident of the West Side and work in the Harvey West area. Both neighborhoods are heavily impacted by RVs residing on city streets for long periods of time. I have experienced sewage tank discharges, garbage left behind, and unleashed aggressive dogs loose around the vehicles, along with having the bike lane blocked.

It's important to note that many of the RVs are from out of state. I'm don't know why we provide free parking and services for tourists next to beaches and public parks at the cost of reducing needed services to local residents. I support the ordinance as written and thank the council members that brought it forward.

Thank you,
Anne Friscia

31.719 1.638
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: David Williams <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 1:02 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Dear City Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of oversized vehicles parked on a long‐term basis on city streets and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of recreational vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
David Williams
114 Limestone Lane
Santa Cruz, CA  95060

31.720 1.639
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Christine Labagh <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 1:11 PM
To: City Council; Donna Meyers; Renee Golder; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Sonja Brunner; Justin Cummings; Sandy Brown; Martine Watkins
Subject: Support For Oversided Vehicle Ordinance With Edits Dear City Council,
I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance if and only if enforcement of the ordinance is independent of the safe parking program and residential annual oversized parking permits are limited to one (1) per address and require current address documentation.

Thank you,
Christine Mantua
Sent from my iPad

31.721 1.640
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Val Leoffler <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 1:10 PM
To: City Council
Cc: Val Leoffler
Subject: Vote yes on the oversized vehicle ordinance
Council Members,
As a resident of the Westside and active community member for the last 50 years, I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Thank you for your work!
Sincerely,
Val Leoffler

31.722 1.641
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Neal Langholz <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 1:11 PM
To: City Council
Subject: vote yes on oversized vehicle ordinance
Dear Mayor Meyers and Councilmembers,
Thank you for tackling the RV problem. Many small businesses that survived the pandemic are now facing impacts from RVs, especially on the west side.

Please votes yes on the RV ordinance and mitigate the negative public health and safety impacts.

Thank you

31.723 1.642
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: patty fishburn <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 1:14 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Vote yes on the oversized vehicle ordinance
Council Members,
Please consider your source of income; us the taxpayers.  Have a central location close to city services for the RVs!!
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Thank you,
Patricia & Gary Fishburn
DeAnza Santa Cruz Mobile Home Park
Sent from my iPhone

31.724 1.643
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: John Burroughs <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 1:16 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
We are concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

We support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, we would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
John & Linda Burroughs
1034 Laurent St

31.725 1.644
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Martha Stewart <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 1:17 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I have not felt safe walking in my neighborhood due to the excess furniture, trash, leashed animals, and odors of excrement present on the roadsides and walkways where the campers are located.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Martha Anne Stewart

31.726 1.645
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: LoriAnn Tarter <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 1:21 PM
To: City Council
Subject: PLEASE Support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance Dear Santa Cruz City Council Members,
I am EXTREMELY concerned and have been very frustrated for several years about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste in my Natural Bridges neighborhood streets, and the increased crime in my neighborhood as well as local businesses.

We are finally getting some wonderful small businesses operating on the Westside of Santa Cruz that are within walking distance, however in order to walk to these businesses, I have to go around RVs, step over waste, witness the ever-increasing amount of trash, and worry about my personal safety. This is not the type of neighborhood I want to live in, and having just paid my property taxes, I am deeply frustrated that with the amount of money that I am paying I am consistently faced with an extremely serious problem that is not being resolved.

Why can’t the laws be enforced that will ensure that my neighborhood is safe and free from trash, and waste so that I can walk down Delaware, or Swift, or Swanton, or Western Drive, or Natural Bridges Dr at any time of the day or night without fear for my safety and frustration with the abuse of this beautiful landscape? I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance. The signs are in place that say no overnight parking, no parking between midnight and 5 am, yet they are being ignored by these RVs and vehicles for days and weeks at a time with no consequence.

Please listen to the folks who are living in the neighborhoods impacted, and facing the ramifications of this lack of oversight daily.

Sincerely,
Lori-Ann Tarter

31.727 1.646
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Tom Lynch <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 1:21 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Oversized vehicle ordinance
Please pass this ordinance which is item 25 on your council agenda.

Thank you.

Sent from my iPhone

31.728 1.647
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Java Bob <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 1:22 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
I just wanted to chime in with our business (Java Bob's Coffee Roasting) supporting the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance on the coming agenda of the city council.  We have had many problems in the past relating o these motor homes and camper vehicles.  Hopefully this will create a better situation for everyone. ‐‐
Regards,
Gerry Woodling
Java Bob's Staff
(831) 425‐7143

31.729 1.648
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: virginialumbard <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 1:25 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Vote yes on the oversized vehicle ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

As a senior citizen living on Delaware Ave., I am nervous about the homeless living outside my door and sick of the garbage they leave all along the street.

Sincerely,
Virginia Lumbard
Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone

31.730 1.649
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: lewersco <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 1:26 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,

31.731 1.650
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bruce Kramer <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 1:29 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Vote yes on the oversized vehicle ordinance
iCouncil Members, I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses. I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff. Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance. Sincerely, Bruce Kramer

31.732 1.651
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Lynn - <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 1:30 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Please vote yes on the oversized vehicle ordinance Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers,
Thank you for all your hard work in developing the oversized vehicle ordinance and the direction towards safe parking where the time, place and manner of parking can be managed.

As of 1:20 PM the uploaded public correspondence contains nearly 10 times as many community members in favor of this ordinance compared to those opposed. Our community recognizes the need for the following:
 Better protection of the oceans and environment
 Increased neighborhood safety for children
 Reduced public health risks caused by poor sanitation and needles  A better situation for local businesses, their customers and employees Thank you for serving as Councilmembers.

Lynn Renshaw

31.733 1.652
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: scbask49 <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 1:32 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.  Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce the ordinance.  Please protect our neighborhoods.

David Baskin
City resident

31.734 1.653
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 1:33 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Dear Council Members:

Like many Santa Cruz residents, I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

Along with homeless encampments, these "mobile homes" have no place on our streets. They are unsafe, unsanitary, and contribute to crime in our neighborhoods. I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance. Sincerely,
Sincerely,
Mark Jansen
[email protected]

31.735 1.654
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Mark Sanchez <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 1:34 PM
To: City Council; Donna Meyers; Renee Golder; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Sonja Brunner; Justin Cummings; Sandy Brown; Martine Watkins
Subject: Support For Oversided Vehicle Ordinance
Dear City Council,
I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance.

An ordinance that helps everyone.

I operate a business and live in the city. The current perception the city portrays to us(citizens and business owners) is that the City of Santa Cruz does not really care about the businesses and residents that operate or live with oversized vehicles.

Lack of an active ordinance and or enforcement of existing laws in our city over the years has required my monitoring of vehicles, picking up trash, putting myself, my employees, my family, my tenants, and my neighbors, in harms way.

Some daily occurrences and procedures that we and our fellow neighbors deal with that you may not be aware of;

1. Call in vehicles that are parked for more than 72 hrs. A dedicated note book is helpful as there are so many vehicles to keep track of. Taking photographs is  also helpful. I keep a separate album in my smartphone with a time stamp. It is imperative to monitor everyday as the numbers of vehicles can grow exponentially.

2. Pick up trash everyday.We do this in the morning but not too early in the morning. This way we catch most of the campers trash that has been thrown out of their motor homes or vehicles. Mostly they throw it in the gutter but often it is on the sidewalk as well. The trash is not always common trash that you would expect in your trash can. Needles are a common occurrence. One of our employees was poked by a needle when emptying a trash bag from a bin she was using picking up trash off the sidewalk. The needle was in a paper bag which then poked through the paper and plastic bag . She was poked by the needle when she lifted the bag out of the bin. She was monitored for one year by a doctor.

3. Approach people in cars( doesn’t always go well)or motor homes that are blocking the sidewalks with bicycles, chairs, and other items that should not be stored on the sidewalk. Having these items cleared from the sidewalk ensures a safe pathway for pedestrians.

An active enforceable ordinance would allow businesses and citizens to focus more on their personal and professional lives.

Please vote in favor for the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance.

Sincerely,
Mark Sanchez

31.736 1.655
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Kenneth Garges <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 1:42 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Support the oversize vehicle parking ordinance Long time resident (28+ years) and I'm asking you to support the proposed oversize vehicle parking ordinance.

31.737 1.656
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: David Zweig <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 1:49 PM
To: City Council
Subject: RV ORDINANCE / SUPPORT
I support the RV ordinance being put forth on Tuesday.

Dave Zweig
148 Walk Circle
Santa Cruz, CA

31.738 1.657
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Kelly <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 1:48 PM
To: City Council; Donna Meyers; Renee Golder; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Sonja Brunner; Justin Cummings; Sandy Brown; Martine Watkins
Subject: Support For Oversided Vehicle Ordinance With Edits Dear City Council, I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance if and only if enforcement of the ordinance is independent of the safe parking program and residential annual oversized parking permits are limited to one (1) per address and require current address documentation.

We have been monitoring and dealing with RV campers in our neighborhood for twenty years. It has been a constant and exhausting endeavor.

One of the more troubling aspects of the street RV living is the lack of environmental awareness and compliance that these RV campers patatice. As members of this community we have put environmental rules in place to help ensure the continued prosperity of our ocean and environs. As a business owner we are not allowed to wash anything that does not result in the water first being put through a greasetrap collection system. This is to ensure that oils, and other toxic substances do not make it into the Monterey Bay. I have personally witnessed, countless times, greywater, as well as refuse being left in the gutters or poured down the storm drains that lead directly to the ocean. If I wash a car or a piece of equipment or a floor map at our building and do not capture the runoff water, I will be sighted for a violation of not first draining that water through a greasetrap collection system.

This system is cleaned quarterly and inspected annually.

The question as well as the observation is that those endeavoring to experience RV camping implies that the people who choose to live in RVs are above the laws that we have all agreed upon in Santa Cruz. The hazards that this may cause is of little to no consequence if people live in RVs on the street.

There is no logic to this. The environment remains at risk no matter where someone lives, their economic situation, or their medical needs. We all have to abide by the laws that we enact despite varying circumstances.

The proposed ordinance component of requiring a permit to sleep in an RV obtained by a homeowner, helps to regulate the housekeeping practices associated with each RV at that location and gives responsibility and oversight by homeowner, the City and the vehicle owner.

Thank you , Kelly Porter

31.739 1.658
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Carole herbert <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 1:56 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Vote yes on the oversized vehicle ordinance
Council Members,<BR><BR>I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.  <BR><BR>I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.<BR><BR>Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.<BR><BR>Sincerely,<BR> Sent from my iPhone

31.740 1.659
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Monika Davidson <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 1:56 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Vote yes on the oversized vehicle ordinance
Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses. I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff. Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.Sincerely,

MONIKA DAVIDSON
Ca. BRE# 01234944
Coldwell Banker Realty
C 650‐465‐7628 | Email [email protected]
www.MonikaDavidson.com

31.741 1.660
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Kelly <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 1:48 PM
To: City Council; Donna Meyers; Renee Golder; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Sonja Brunner; Justin Cummings; Sandy Brown; Martine Watkins
Subject: Support For Oversided Vehicle Ordinance With Edits Dear City Council, I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance if and only if enforcement of the ordinance is independent of the safe parking program and residential annual oversized parking permits are limited to one (1) per address and require current address documentation.

We have been monitoring and dealing with RV campers in our neighborhood for twenty years. It has been a constant and exhausting endeavor.

One of the more troubling aspects of the street RV living is the lack of environmental awareness and compliance that these RV campers patatice. As members of this community we have put environmental rules in place to help ensure the continued prosperity of our ocean and environs. As a business owner we are not allowed to wash anything that does not result in the water first being put through a greasetrap collection system. This is to ensure that oils, and other toxic substances do not make it into the Monterey Bay. I have personally witnessed, countless times, greywater, as well as refuse being left in the gutters or poured down the storm drains that lead directly to the ocean. If I wash a car or a piece of equipment or a floor map at our building and do not capture the runoff water, I will be sighted for a violation of not first draining that water through a greasetrap collection system.

This system is cleaned quarterly and inspected annually.

The question as well as the observation is that those endeavoring to experience RV camping implies that the people who choose to live in RVs are above the laws that we have all agreed upon in Santa Cruz. The hazards that this may cause is of little to no consequence if people live in RVs on the street.

There is no logic to this. The environment remains at risk no matter where someone lives, their economic situation, or their medical needs. We all have to abide by the laws that we enact despite varying circumstances.

The proposed ordinance component of requiring a permit to sleep in an RV obtained by a homeowner, helps to regulate the housekeeping practices associated with each RV at that location and gives responsibility and oversight by homeowner, the City and the vehicle owner.

Thank you , Kelly Porter

31.742 1.661
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Masao Drexel <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 2:07 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Supporting the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Dear City Council,
I strongly support the city taking steps to reduce the rampant misuse of our city streets as vehicle campgrounds. I am raising a family on David Way and have people parking on our street nightly. We often wake up to the loud noises of generators and large engine at night. We have garbage, needles and urine showing up on the sidewalk in front of our house. And have to deal with the the accompanying drug use and theft that often accompanies this “lifestyle”.

Please pass this ordinance as a first step in moving these oversized vehicles to safe spaces off our city streets.

Best,
Masao Drexel
110 David Way

31.743 1.662
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Frans Lanting <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 2:09 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Dear Council Members,
I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Frans Lanting
Frans Lanting Studio
108 High Road
Santa Cruz, CA 95060 USA
+1-831-429-1331 (Office)
[email protected]
www.lanting.com
instagram.com/@franslanting

31.744 1.663
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bill Brooks <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 2:11 PM
To: City Council
Subject: MOTORHOMES
Yes on NO MOTORHOMES PARKING ON CITY STREETS.

Please provide a big lot for the Homeless in Motorhomes to park and when full ticket anyone that parks on the street. Tell them were “full up” with our share of homeless and they need to move on to another city that has a shortage or is lax with enforcement as Santa Cruz.

William Brooks
400 Highland Ave
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
831 459‐6060

31.745 1.664
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 2:11 PM
To: City Council; Donna Meyers; Renee Golder; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Sonja Brunner; Justin Cummings; Sandy Brown; Martine Watkins
Subject: Support For Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Dear City Council,
Please vote yes on the OVO with the following changes, enforcement of the ordinance is independent of the safe parking program and residential annual oversized parking permits are limited to one (1) per address and require current address documentation.

The Westside is in dire need for this ordinance to pass. The number of oversize vehicles parked on city streets in zones that are no parking from 12pm to 6am is out of control and still growing. I live adjacent to the streets where these oversized vehicles are parked and I avoid these areas as much as possible now after encountering human feces and urine, garbage and dogs off leash and I don't feel safe.

Thank you,
Krista Cook

31.746 1.665
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Scott Richards <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 2:14 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance
Council Members,
The walking streets have become unsafe and polluted on the west side. I have seen where an Rv dumped their sewage and pet litter box (with all the fillings) in the curb on the corner of Almar & west cliff‐draining directly into the ocean. While walking down Delaware to long’s marine lab I’ve been verbally hassled.

We need a controlled setting where these Rv’s can stay, with facilities for everyone’s benefit.

I am concerned about the growing number of Oversized Vehicles and the accompanying environmental damage, discarded waste on our streets, and the increased crime in our neighborhoods and businesses.

I support your efforts on the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance currently under consideration by the Council and city staff.

Specifically, I would like to see more strict permitting for temporary parking of Recreational Vehicles on city streets and in public spaces, as well as provisions for SCPD to effectively enforce this ordinance.

Sincerely,
Scott
(831‐234‐3161)
Pay It Forward!

31.747 1.666
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Diana Holm <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 2:23 PM
To: City Council
Cc: Sanford
Subject: Oversized Vehicle Ordinance - Diana Holm and Sanford Bingham / FileOpen Systems / PCS
Council Members,
In 2014, we took a leap of faith and purchased the first live/work space in the Delaware Addition, to grow our software business FileOpen Systems and also to raise our two children, who are now 13 and 16. Our space is at 100 High Road, which faces Delaware Avenue between Swift St. and Natural Bridges Drive.

Since we moved in, the presence of dilapidated RVs has gotten worse and worse, often lining the entire length of Delaware Ave out to Shaffer St. We have been witness to dangerous fights and arguments, drug busts, and even fires within yards of our home. We can't use the sidewalk because of garbage and toxic junk overflowing and blocking passage, not to mention off-leash dogs belonging to RV owners. The green spaces, including Natural Bridges State Park, reek of urine from people using them as a bathroom. Despite the city's efforts, asking the RVs to move on is a game of whack-a-mole -- they come right back within hours.

We have progressive views toward income inequality and homelessness and recognize that these issues stem from much bigger problems than our neighborhood in Santa Cruz. But a city street that is near businesses, residences, a state beach and several schools is no place for what has essentially become an unmanaged trailer park.