Agenda packet — Santa Cruz City Council, June 28, 2022 (part 4 of 7)

Please reply to Colin Murphy at [email protected].

To learn more about Do Gooder visit www.dogooder.co To learn more about web protocol RFC 3834 visit:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3834

41.48 5
Rosemary Balsley
From: Alexandra Au <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, June 17, 2022 1:14 AM
To: Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; City Council
Cc: Bonnie Bush
Subject: Adopt the Empty Home Tax Now!
Dear Councilmember
Santa Cruz is in an affordable housing crisis! Our essential workers including teachers, healthcare workers, childcare providers and service workers cannot afford to live in our town. These workers are the engine of Santa Cruz's vibrant culture and economy. I am writing you today to urge you to take action today to adopt the community‐driven Empty Home Tax Ordinance.

Over 6000 residents of Santa Cruz signed the petition to support putting the Empty Home Tax on the ballot, but we don't have to wait for November. Recent numbers from the California Department of Finance report a 9% vacancy rate in Santa Cruz. Everyone in Santa Cruz has that house or houses in their neighborhood where no one every seems to be home. Property owners across the city have raised their hand and supported the Empty Home Tax because it is fair, balanced and will help ensure their friends, family and kids can stay living here too.

We want our neighbors to be at home. We want community. We want Santa Cruz to be accessible. We want economic diversity which drives racial and cultural diversity. These are the things that make Santa Cruz special.

Please help keep Santa Cruz vibrant and thriving by adopting the Empty Home Tax today! Yours sincerely,
Alexandra Au
___________________________
This email was sent by Alexandra Au via Do Gooder, a website that allows people to contact you regarding issues they consider important. In accordance with web protocol RFC 3834 we have set the FROM field of this email to our generic no‐reply address at [email protected], however Alexandra provided an email address ([email protected]) which we included in the REPLY‐TO field.

Please reply to Alexandra Au at [email protected].

To learn more about Do Gooder visit www.dogooder.co To learn more about web protocol RFC 3834 visit:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3834

41.49 6
Rosemary Balsley
From: Maria Vega <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, June 17, 2022 8:38 AM
To: Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; City Council
Cc: Bonnie Bush
Subject: Adopt the Empty Home Tax Now!
Dear Councilmember
Santa Cruz is in an affordable housing crisis! Our essential workers including teachers, healthcare workers, childcare providers and service workers cannot afford to live in our town. These workers are the engine of Santa Cruz's vibrant culture and economy. I am writing you today to urge you to take action today to adopt the community‐driven Empty Home Tax Ordinance.

Over 6000 residents of Santa Cruz signed the petition to support putting the Empty Home Tax on the ballot, but we don't have to wait for November. Recent numbers from the California Department of Finance report a 9% vacancy rate in Santa Cruz. Everyone in Santa Cruz has that house or houses in their neighborhood where no one every seems to be home. Property owners across the city have raised their hand and supported the Empty Home Tax because it is fair, balanced and will help ensure their friends, family and kids can stay living here too.

Please help keep Santa Cruz vibrant and thriving by adopting the Empty Home Tax today! Yours sincerely,
Maria Vega
___________________________
This email was sent by Maria Vega via Do Gooder, a website that allows people to contact you regarding issues they consider important. In accordance with web protocol RFC 3834 we have set the FROM field of this email to our generic no‐reply address at [email protected], however Maria provided an email address ([email protected]) which we included in the REPLY‐TO field.

Please reply to Maria Vega at [email protected].

To learn more about Do Gooder visit www.dogooder.co To learn more about web protocol RFC 3834 visit:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3834

41.50 7
Rosemary Balsley
From: John McKelvey <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, June 18, 2022 8:56 PM
To: Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; City Council
Cc: Bonnie Bush
Subject: Reject the Empty Home Tax Now!
Dear Councilmembers,
I am writing you today to urge you to reject adoption of the ideologically‐driven and poorly‐crafted Empty Home Tax Ordinance.

Over 6000 residents of Santa Cruz were tricked into signing the petition to support putting the Empty Home Tax on the ballot, and we need to protect the public interest by rejecting the lies spread by EHT supporters both during the signature drive and the ongoing campaign Please help keep Santa Cruz vibrant and thriving by rejecting the Empty Home Tax today! Yours sincerely,
John McKelvey
___________________________
This email was sent by John McKelvey via Do Gooder, a website that allows people to contact you regarding issues they consider important. In accordance with web protocol RFC 3834 we have set the FROM field of this email to our generic no‐reply address at [email protected], however John provided an email address ([email protected]) which we included in the REPLY‐TO field.

Please reply to John McKelvey at [email protected].

To learn more about Do Gooder visit www.dogooder.co To learn more about web protocol RFC 3834 visit:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3834

41.51 8
Rosemary Balsley
From: Joy Schendledecker <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, June 20, 2022 2:27 PM
To: Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; City Council
Cc: Bonnie Bush
Subject: Adopt the Empty Home Tax Now!
Dear Councilmember
Santa Cruz is in an affordable housing crisis! Our essential workers including teachers, healthcare workers, childcare providers and service workers cannot afford to live in our town. Many of our own working, tax‐ paying, contributing constituents are living with precarious or no housing. These workers are the engine of Santa Cruz's vibrant culture and economy. I am writing you today to urge you to take action today to adopt the community‐driven Empty Home Tax Ordinance.

I am an active voter and council meeting watcher. I ask you to adopt the Empty Home Tax now. I will be taking note of who supports it and will vote accordingly in November and in the future.

I walk in my neighborhood almost every day and see the same homes empty for long periods of time. One house a block over has had a low battery chirp from a carbon monoxide or smoke detector since last summer! I want to see homes occupied with neighbors who are part of our community.

The divide between have and have not has been growing here for many years, I support wealth taxes and policies that work to decrease that divide.

Please help keep Santa Cruz vibrant and thriving by adopting the Empty Home Tax today! Yours sincerely,
Joy Schendledecker
___________________________
This email was sent by Joy Schendledecker via Do Gooder, a website that allows people to contact you regarding issues they consider important. In accordance with web protocol RFC 3834 we have set the FROM field of this email to our generic no‐reply address at [email protected], however Joy provided an email address ([email protected]) which we included in the REPLY‐TO field.

Please reply to Joy Schendledecker at [email protected].

To learn more about Do Gooder visit www.dogooder.co To learn more about web protocol RFC 3834 visit:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3834

41.52 9
Rosemary Balsley
From: Jack McCourt <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, June 20, 2022 3:53 PM
To: Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; City Council
Cc: Bonnie Bush
Subject: Adopt the Empty Home Tax Now!
Dear Councilmember,
Santa Cruz is in an affordable housing crisis! Our essential workers including teachers, healthcare workers, childcare providers and service workers cannot afford to live in our town. These workers are the engine of Santa Cruz's vibrant culture and economy. I am writing you today to urge you to take action today to adopt the community‐driven Empty Home Tax Ordinance.

Over 6000 residents of Santa Cruz signed the petition to support putting the Empty Home Tax on the ballot, but we don't have to wait for November. Recent numbers from the California Department of Finance report a 9% vacancy rate in Santa Cruz. Everyone in Santa Cruz has that house or houses in their neighborhood where no one ever seems to be home. Property owners across the city have raised their hand and supported the Empty Home Tax because it is fair, balanced and will help ensure their friends, family and kids can stay living here too.

How many people do we have to see priced out of our town, or into homelessness? We want our neighbors to be at home. We want community. We want Santa Cruz to be accessible. We want economic diversity which drives racial and cultural diversity. These are the things that make Santa Cruz special.

Please help keep Santa Cruz vibrant and thriving by adopting the Empty Home Tax today! Yours sincerely,
Jack McCourt
___________________________
This email was sent by Jack McCourt via Do Gooder, a website that allows people to contact you regarding issues they consider important. In accordance with web protocol RFC 3834 we have set the FROM field of this email to our generic no‐reply address at [email protected], however Jack provided an email address ([email protected]) which we included in the REPLY‐TO field.

Please reply to Jack McCourt at [email protected].

To learn more about Do Gooder visit www.dogooder.co To learn more about web protocol RFC 3834 visit:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3834

41.53 10
Rosemary Balsley
From: Vicki Winters Winters <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, June 20, 2022 4:19 PM
To: Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; City Council
Cc: Bonnie Bush
Subject: Our Community Needs the Empty Home Tax
Dear Councilmember,
As you know, the affordable housing crisis in Santa Cruz has only gotten worse since you were elected. Our essential workers cannot afford to live in our town. This is not sustainable and affects the quality of life of everyone in our community. I am writing today to urge you to take action to adopt the community‐driven Empty Home Tax Ordinance.

Over 6000 residents of Santa Cruz signed the petition to support putting the Empty Home Tax on the ballot, but we don't have to wait for November. Recent numbers from the California Department of Finance report a 9% vacancy rate in Santa Cruz. Everyone in Santa Cruz has that house or houses in their neighborhood where no one every seems to be home. Property owners across the city have raised their hand and supported the Empty Home Tax because it is fair, balanced and will help ensure their friends, family and kids can stay living here too.

Please help keep Santa Cruz vibrant and thriving by adopting the Empty Home Tax today! Yours sincerely,
Vicki Winters Winters
___________________________
This email was sent by Vicki Winters Winters via Do Gooder, a website that allows people to contact you regarding issues they consider important. In accordance with web protocol RFC 3834 we have set the FROM field of this email to our generic no‐reply address at [email protected], however Vicki Winters provided an email address ([email protected]) which we included in the REPLY‐TO field.

Please reply to Vicki Winters Winters at [email protected].

To learn more about Do Gooder visit www.dogooder.co To learn more about web protocol RFC 3834 visit:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3834

41.54 11
Rosemary Balsley
From: Bodie Shargel <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, June 20, 2022 4:23 PM
To: Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; City Council
Cc: Bonnie Bush
Subject: Adopt the Empty Home Tax Now!
Dear Councilmember
Santa Cruz is in an affordable housing crisis! Our essential workers including teachers, healthcare workers, childcare providers and service workers cannot afford to live in our town. These workers are the engine of Santa Cruz's vibrant culture and economy. I am writing you today to urge you to take action today to adopt the community‐driven Empty Home Tax Ordinance.

Over 6000 residents of Santa Cruz signed the petition to support putting the Empty Home Tax on the ballot, but we don't have to wait for November. Recent numbers from the California Department of Finance report a 9% vacancy rate in Santa Cruz. Everyone in Santa Cruz has that house or houses in their neighborhood where no one every seems to be home. Property owners across the city have raised their hand and supported the Empty Home Tax because it is fair, balanced and will help ensure their friends, family and kids can stay living here too.

Please help keep Santa Cruz vibrant and thriving by adopting the Empty Home Tax today! Yours sincerely,
Bodie Shargel
___________________________
This email was sent by Bodie Shargel via Do Gooder, a website that allows people to contact you regarding issues they consider important. In accordance with web protocol RFC 3834 we have set the FROM field of this email to our generic no‐reply address at [email protected], however Bodie provided an email address ([email protected]) which we included in the REPLY‐TO field.

Please reply to Bodie Shargel at [email protected].

To learn more about Do Gooder visit www.dogooder.co To learn more about web protocol RFC 3834 visit:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3834

41.55 12
Rosemary Balsley
From: Lisa Sprinkle <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, June 20, 2022 4:45 PM
To: Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; City Council
Cc: Bonnie Bush
Subject: Adopt the Empty Home Tax Now!
Dear Councilmember
Santa Cruz is in an affordable housing crisis! Our essential workers including teachers, healthcare workers, childcare providers and service workers cannot afford to live in our town. These workers are the engine of Santa Cruz's vibrant culture and economy. I am writing you today to urge you to take action today to adopt the community‐driven Empty Home Tax Ordinance.

Over 6000 residents of Santa Cruz signed the petition to support putting the Empty Home Tax on the ballot, but we don't have to wait for November. Recent numbers from the California Department of Finance report a 9% vacancy rate in Santa Cruz. Everyone in Santa Cruz has that house or houses in their neighborhood where no one every seems to be home. Property owners across the city have raised their hand and supported the Empty Home Tax because it is fair, balanced and will help ensure their friends, family and kids can stay living here too.

Please help keep Santa Cruz vibrant and thriving by adopting the Empty Home Tax today! Yours sincerely,
Lisa Sprinkle
___________________________
This email was sent by Lisa Sprinkle via Do Gooder, a website that allows people to contact you regarding issues they consider important. In accordance with web protocol RFC 3834 we have set the FROM field of this email to our generic no‐reply address at [email protected], however Lisa provided an email address ([email protected]) which we included in the REPLY‐TO field.

Please reply to Lisa Sprinkle at [email protected].

To learn more about Do Gooder visit www.dogooder.co To learn more about web protocol RFC 3834 visit:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3834

41.56 13
Rosemary Balsley
From: Diana Purucker <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, June 20, 2022 8:07 PM
To: Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; City Council
Cc: Bonnie Bush
Subject: Adopt the Empty Home Tax Now!
Dear Councilmember
Santa Cruz is in an affordable housing crisis! Our essential workers including teachers, healthcare workers, childcare providers and service workers cannot afford to live in our town. These workers are the engine of Santa Cruz's vibrant culture and economy. I am writing you today to urge you to take action today to adopt the community‐driven Empty Home Tax Ordinance.

Over 6000 residents of Santa Cruz signed the petition to support putting the Empty Home Tax on the ballot, but we don't have to wait for November. Recent numbers from the California Department of Finance report a 9% vacancy rate in Santa Cruz. Everyone in Santa Cruz has that house or houses in their neighborhood where no one every seems to be home. Property owners across the city have raised their hand and supported the Empty Home Tax because it is fair, balanced and will help ensure their friends, family and kids can stay living here too.

Please help keep Santa Cruz vibrant and thriving by adopting the Empty Home Tax today! Yours sincerely,
Diana Purucker
___________________________
This email was sent by Diana Purucker via Do Gooder, a website that allows people to contact you regarding issues they consider important. In accordance with web protocol RFC 3834 we have set the FROM field of this email to our generic no‐reply address at [email protected], however Diana provided an email address ([email protected]) which we included in the REPLY‐TO field.

Please reply to Diana Purucker at [email protected].

To learn more about Do Gooder visit www.dogooder.co To learn more about web protocol RFC 3834 visit:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3834

41.57 14
Rosemary Balsley
From: Reggie Meisler <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, June 20, 2022 8:16 PM
To: Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; City Council
Cc: Bonnie Bush
Subject: Adopt the Empty Home Tax Now!
Dear Councilmember
Santa Cruz is in an affordable housing crisis! Our essential workers including teachers, healthcare workers, childcare providers and service workers cannot afford to live in our town. These workers are the engine of Santa Cruz's vibrant culture and economy. I am writing you today to urge you to take action today to adopt the community‐driven Empty Home Tax Ordinance.

Over 6000 residents of Santa Cruz signed the petition to support putting the Empty Home Tax on the ballot, but we don't have to wait for November. Recent numbers from the California Department of Finance report a 9% vacancy rate in Santa Cruz. Everyone in Santa Cruz has that house or houses in their neighborhood where no one every seems to be home. Property owners across the city have raised their hand and supported the Empty Home Tax because it is fair, balanced and will help ensure their friends, family and kids can stay living here too.

Please help keep Santa Cruz vibrant and thriving by adopting the Empty Home Tax today! Yours sincerely,
Reggie Meisler
___________________________
This email was sent by Reggie Meisler via Do Gooder, a website that allows people to contact you regarding issues they consider important. In accordance with web protocol RFC 3834 we have set the FROM field of this email to our generic no‐reply address at [email protected], however Reggie provided an email address ([email protected]) which we included in the REPLY‐TO field.

Please reply to Reggie Meisler at [email protected].

To learn more about Do Gooder visit www.dogooder.co To learn more about web protocol RFC 3834 visit:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3834

41.58 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Tj Demos <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2022 9:52 AM
To: Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; City Council
Cc: Bonnie Bush
Subject: Adopt the Empty Home Tax Now!
Dear Council member:

I write as a Westside Santa Cruz homeowner who is strongly in support of the Empty Home Tax. Santa Cruz is in an affordable housing crisis! Our essential workers including teachers, healthcare workers, childcare providers and service workers cannot afford to live in our town. These workers are the engine of Santa Cruz's vibrant culture and economy.

I am deeply concerned that Santa Cruz is becoming increasingly gentrified, and younger generations, including former students, are not able to afford to live in our city. The result is a pronounced lack of diversity in terms of race and class. As a result our city is becoming less dynamic, less inclusive, and more a city of the propertied elite.

I am writing you today to urge you to take action today to adopt the community‐driven Empty Home Tax Ordinance.

Everyone in Santa Cruz has that house or houses in their neighborhood where no one every seems to be home. Property owners across the city have raised their hand and supported the Empty Home Tax because it is fair, balanced and will help ensure their friends, family and kids can stay living here too.

We want our neighbors to be at home. We want inclusive community. We want Santa Cruz to be accessible.

We want economic diversity which drives racial and cultural diversity. These are the things that make Santa Cruz special. Please help keep Santa Cruz vibrant and thriving by adopting the Empty Home Tax today! Yours sincerely,
Tj Demos
Westside Santa Cruz homeowner and UCSC professor
___________________________
This email was sent by Tj Demos via Do Gooder, a website that allows people to contact you regarding issues they consider important. In accordance with web protocol RFC 3834 we have set the FROM field of this email to our generic no‐reply address at [email protected], however Tj provided an email address ([email protected]) which we included in the REPLY‐TO field.

Please reply to Tj Demos at [email protected].

41.59 2
To learn more about Do Gooder visit www.dogooder.co To learn more about web protocol RFC 3834 visit:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3834

41.60 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Peter Cook <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2022 5:58 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Please Vote NO for the Invasive Homeowner Registry Dear Council Members,
Please vote to put the Invasive Homeowner Registry on the November ballot to allow the community to reject this ridiculous initiative.

I hope I can count on all of you to endorse NO on this initiative in November. This initiative would cost the city general fund a ton of money and lead to endless lawsuits and unnecessary invasions into homeowner’s homes and finances. The citizens elect you to represent us, we don’t need small groups of highly partisan citizens continually trying to do an end around on your leadership with divisive initiatives.

Thank you for your service. You deserve to be paid more!!!!!! Best,

41.61 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Amanda Harris Altice <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2022 10:09 PM
To: Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; City Council
Cc: Bonnie Bush
Subject: Adopt the Empty Home Tax Now!
Dear Councilmember,
Santa Cruz is in an affordable housing crisis! Our essential workers including teachers, healthcare workers, childcare providers, and service workers cannot afford to live in our town. These workers are the engine of Santa Cruz's vibrant culture and economy. I am writing you today to urge you to take action today to adopt the community‐driven Empty Home Tax Ordinance.

Over 6000 residents of Santa Cruz signed the petition to support putting the Empty Home Tax on the ballot, but we don't have to wait for November. Recent numbers from the California Department of Finance report a 9% vacancy rate in Santa Cruz. Everyone in Santa Cruz has that house or houses in their neighborhood where no one every seems to be home. Property owners across the city have raised their hand and supported the Empty Home Tax because it is fair, balanced and will help ensure their friends, family and kids can stay living here too.

Please help keep Santa Cruz vibrant and thriving by adopting the Empty Home Tax today! Yours sincerely,
Amanda Harris Altice
___________________________
This email was sent by Amanda Harris Altice via Do Gooder, a website that allows people to contact you regarding issues they consider important. In accordance with web protocol RFC 3834 we have set the FROM field of this email to our generic no‐reply address at [email protected], however Amanda provided an email address ([email protected]) which we included in the REPLY‐TO field.

Please reply to Amanda Harris Altice at [email protected].

To learn more about Do Gooder visit www.dogooder.co To learn more about web protocol RFC 3834 visit:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3834

41.62 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Sheila Carrillo <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2022 6:34 AM
To: Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; City Council
Cc: Bonnie Bush
Subject: Adopt the Empty Home Tax Now!
Dear Councilmember
EMPTY HOME TAX IS ONE STEP TOWARD HOUSING EQUITY IN A CITY THAT IS UNLIVABLE FOR A WORKING PERSON WHILE THOUSANDS OF HOUSES SIT EMPTY. Santa Cruz is in an affordable housing crisis! Our essential workers including teachers, healthcare workers, childcare providers and service workers cannot afford to live in our town. These workers are the engine of Santa Cruz's vibrant culture and economy. I am writing you today to urge you to take action today to adopt the community‐driven Empty Home Tax Ordinance.

Over 6000 residents of Santa Cruz signed the petition to support putting the Empty Home Tax on the ballot, but we don't have to wait for November. Recent numbers from the California Department of Finance report a 9% vacancy rate in Santa Cruz. Everyone in Santa Cruz has that house or houses in their neighborhood where no one every seems to be home. Property owners across the city have raised their hand and supported the Empty Home Tax because it is fair, balanced and will help ensure their friends, family and kids can stay living here too.

Please help keep Santa Cruz vibrant and thriving by adopting the Empty Home Tax today! Yours sincerely,
Sheila Carrillo
___________________________
This email was sent by Sheila Carrillo via Do Gooder, a website that allows people to contact you regarding issues they consider important. In accordance with web protocol RFC 3834 we have set the FROM field of this email to our generic no‐reply address at [email protected], however Sheila provided an email address ([email protected]) which we included in the REPLY‐TO field.

Please reply to Sheila Carrillo at [email protected].

To learn more about Do Gooder visit www.dogooder.co To learn more about web protocol RFC 3834 visit:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3834

41.63 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Nick Thornstrong <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2022 8:16 AM
To: Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; City Council
Cc: Bonnie Bush
Subject: Adopt the Empty Home Tax Now!
Dear Councilmember
Santa Cruz is in an affordable housing crisis! Our essential workers including teachers, healthcare workers, childcare providers and service workers cannot afford to live in our town. These workers are the engine of Santa Cruz's vibrant culture and economy. I am writing you today to urge you to take action today to adopt the community‐driven Empty Home Tax Ordinance.

Over 6000 residents of Santa Cruz signed the petition to support putting the Empty Home Tax on the ballot, but we don't have to wait for November. Recent numbers from the California Department of Finance report a 9% vacancy rate in Santa Cruz. Everyone in Santa Cruz has that house or houses in their neighborhood where no one every seems to be home. Property owners across the city have raised their hand and supported the Empty Home Tax because it is fair, balanced and will help ensure their friends, family and kids can stay living here too.

Please help keep Santa Cruz vibrant and thriving by adopting the Empty Home Tax today! Yours sincerely,
Nick Thornstrong
___________________________
This email was sent by Nick Thornstrong via Do Gooder, a website that allows people to contact you regarding issues they consider important. In accordance with web protocol RFC 3834 we have set the FROM field of this email to our generic no‐reply address at [email protected], however Nick provided an email address ([email protected]) which we included in the REPLY‐TO field.

Please reply to Nick Thornstrong at [email protected].

To learn more about Do Gooder visit www.dogooder.co To learn more about web protocol RFC 3834 visit:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3834

41.64 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Melissa Mendes Campos <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2022 8:50 AM
To: Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; City Council
Cc: Bonnie Bush
Subject: Adopt the Empty Home Tax Now!
Dear Councilmember,
As you know, Santa Cruz is in an affordable housing crisis! Increasingly, essential workers‐‐those our community depends on‐‐including teachers, healthcare workers, childcare providers, and service workers cannot afford to live here. This impacts us all. I am writing you today to urge you to take action today to adopt the community‐driven Empty Home Tax Ordinance.

Over 6,000 residents of Santa Cruz signed the petition to support putting the Empty Home Tax on the ballot, but we don't have to wait for November‐‐we can take action now. Recent numbers from the California Department of Finance report a 9% vacancy rate in Santa Cruz. Looking around, we all see that house or houses in our neighborhoods where no one is living. Property owners across the city have raised their hand and supported the Empty Home Tax because it is fair, reasonable, and will help ensure our friends, family, and kids can stay living here too.

We want our neighbors to be at home. We want community. We want Santa Cruz to be accessible. We want economic diversity, which drives racial and cultural diversity. These are the things that we need to make Santa Cruz special. Please help Santa Cruz stay vibrant and thriving by adopting the Empty Home Tax today! Yours sincerely,
Melissa Mendes Campos
___________________________
This email was sent by Melissa Mendes Campos via Do Gooder, a website that allows people to contact you regarding issues they consider important. In accordance with web protocol RFC 3834 we have set the FROM field of this email to our generic no‐reply address at [email protected], however Melissa provided an email address ([email protected]) which we included in the REPLY‐TO field.

Please reply to Melissa Mendes Campos at [email protected].

To learn more about Do Gooder visit www.dogooder.co To learn more about web protocol RFC 3834 visit:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3834

41.65 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Lane Ilstrup <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2022 9:27 AM
To: Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; City Council
Cc: Bonnie Bush
Subject: Adopt the Empty Home Tax Now!
Dear Councilmember,
I am a former Santa Cruz resident of 18 years ‐ I had to move from this city where I was raised when I graduated high school. Why? In part because of the affordable housing crisis facing the Santa Cruz community.

I knew I couldn't make it on my own ‐ I couldn't afford to live here, and had to leave my family, friends, and place I knew behind for another state. The council needs to make moves to help combat this issue that is rendering Santa Cruz unlivable for so many community members. The Empty Homes Tax is a part of that move.

Additionally, our essential workers including teachers, healthcare workers, childcare providers and service workers cannot afford to live in our town. These workers are the engine of Santa Cruz's vibrant culture and economy. I am writing you today to urge you to take action today to adopt the community‐driven Empty Home Tax Ordinance.

Over 6000 residents of Santa Cruz signed the petition to support putting the Empty Home Tax on the ballot, but we don't have to wait for November. Recent numbers from the California Department of Finance report a 9% vacancy rate in Santa Cruz. Everyone in Santa Cruz has that house or houses in their neighborhood where no one every seems to be home. Property owners across the city have raised their hand and supported the Empty Home Tax because it is fair, balanced and will help ensure their friends, family and kids can stay living here too.

Please help keep Santa Cruz vibrant and thriving by adopting the Empty Home Tax today! Yours sincerely,
Lane Ilstrup
___________________________
This email was sent by Lane Ilstrup via Do Gooder, a website that allows people to contact you regarding issues they consider important. In accordance with web protocol RFC 3834 we have set the FROM field of this email to our generic no‐reply address at [email protected], however Lane provided an email address ([email protected]) which we included in the REPLY‐TO field.

Please reply to Lane Ilstrup at [email protected].

To learn more about Do Gooder visit www.dogooder.co To learn more about web protocol RFC 3834 visit:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3834

41.66 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Kaitlyn Gonzalez <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2022 9:44 AM
To: Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; City Council
Cc: Bonnie Bush
Subject: Adopt the Empty Home Tax Now!
Dear Councilmember
Santa Cruz is in an affordable housing crisis! Our essential workers including teachers, healthcare workers, childcare providers and service workers cannot afford to live in our town. These workers are the engine of Santa Cruz's vibrant culture and economy. I am writing you today to urge you to take action today to adopt the community‐driven Empty Home Tax Ordinance.

Over 6000 residents of Santa Cruz signed the petition to support putting the Empty Home Tax on the ballot, but we don't have to wait for November. Recent numbers from the California Department of Finance report a 9% vacancy rate in Santa Cruz. Everyone in Santa Cruz has that house or houses in their neighborhood where no one every seems to be home. Property owners across the city have raised their hand and supported the Empty Home Tax because it is fair, balanced and will help ensure their friends, family and kids can stay living here too.

Please help keep Santa Cruz vibrant and thriving by adopting the Empty Home Tax today! Yours sincerely,
Kaitlyn Gonzalez
___________________________
This email was sent by Kaitlyn Gonzalez via Do Gooder, a website that allows people to contact you regarding issues they consider important. In accordance with web protocol RFC 3834 we have set the FROM field of this email to our generic no‐reply address at [email protected], however Kaitlyn provided an email address ([email protected]) which we included in the REPLY‐TO field.

Please reply to Kaitlyn Gonzalez at [email protected].

To learn more about Do Gooder visit www.dogooder.co To learn more about web protocol RFC 3834 visit:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3834

41.67 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Thairie Ritchie <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2022 10:07 AM
To: Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; City Council
Cc: Bonnie Bush
Subject: Adopt the Empty Home Tax Now!
Dear Councilmember
Santa Cruz is in an affordable housing crisis! Our essential workers including teachers, healthcare workers, childcare providers and service workers cannot afford to live in our town. These workers are the engine of Santa Cruz's vibrant culture and economy. I am writing you today to urge you to take action today to adopt the community‐driven Empty Home Tax Ordinance.

Over 6000 residents of Santa Cruz signed the petition to support putting the Empty Home Tax on the ballot, but we don't have to wait for November. Recent numbers from the California Department of Finance report a 9% vacancy rate in Santa Cruz. Everyone in Santa Cruz has that house or houses in their neighborhood where no one every seems to be home. Property owners across the city have raised their hand and supported the Empty Home Tax because it is fair, balanced and will help ensure their friends, family and kids can stay living here too.

Please help keep Santa Cruz vibrant and thriving by adopting the Empty Home Tax today! Yours sincerely,
Thairie Ritchie
___________________________
This email was sent by Thairie Ritchie via Do Gooder, a website that allows people to contact you regarding issues they consider important. In accordance with web protocol RFC 3834 we have set the FROM field of this email to our generic no‐reply address at [email protected], however Thairie provided an email address ([email protected]) which we included in the REPLY‐TO field.

Please reply to Thairie Ritchie at [email protected].

To learn more about Do Gooder visit www.dogooder.co To learn more about web protocol RFC 3834 visit:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3834

41.68 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Megan Kilmer Kilmer <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2022 10:09 AM
To: Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; City Council
Cc: Bonnie Bush
Subject: Adopt the Empty Home Tax Now!
Dear Councilmember
Santa Cruz is in an affordable housing crisis! Our essential workers including teachers, healthcare workers, childcare providers and service workers cannot afford to live in our town. These workers are the engine of Santa Cruz's vibrant culture and economy. I am writing you today to urge you to take action today to adopt the community‐driven Empty Home Tax Ordinance.

Over 6000 residents of Santa Cruz signed the petition to support putting the Empty Home Tax on the ballot, but we don't have to wait for November. Recent numbers from the California Department of Finance report a 9% vacancy rate in Santa Cruz. Everyone in Santa Cruz has that house or houses in their neighborhood where no one every seems to be home. Property owners across the city have raised their hand and supported the Empty Home Tax because it is fair, balanced and will help ensure their friends, family and kids can stay living here too.

Please help keep Santa Cruz vibrant and thriving by adopting the Empty Home Tax today! Yours sincerely,
Megan Kilmer
___________________________
This email was sent by Megan Kilmer Kilmer via Do Gooder, a website that allows people to contact you regarding issues they consider important. In accordance with web protocol RFC 3834 we have set the FROM field of this email to our generic no‐reply address at [email protected], however Megan Kilmer provided an email address ([email protected]) which we included in the REPLY‐TO field.

Please reply to Megan Kilmer Kilmer at [email protected].

To learn more about Do Gooder visit www.dogooder.co To learn more about web protocol RFC 3834 visit:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3834

41.69 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Rebecca Cooper <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2022 10:16 AM
To: Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; City Council
Cc: Bonnie Bush
Subject: Adopt the Empty Home Tax Now!
Dear Councilmember,
Essential workers, including those who work to house the unhoused, are struggling and are becoming unhoused. This isn't becoming a crisis, it is far surpassed and completely into a crisis. I make roughly twice minimum wage and can't get even a 1 bedroom for my son and I. Changes have to happen, and immediately.

Santa Cruz is in an affordable housing crisis! Our essential workers including teachers, healthcare workers, childcare providers and service workers cannot afford to live in our town. These workers are the engine of Santa Cruz's vibrant culture and economy. I am writing you today to urge you to take action today to adopt the community‐driven Empty Home Tax Ordinance.

Over 6000 residents of Santa Cruz signed the petition to support putting the Empty Home Tax on the ballot, but we don't have to wait for November. Recent numbers from the California Department of Finance report a 9% vacancy rate in Santa Cruz. Everyone in Santa Cruz has that house or houses in their neighborhood where no one every seems to be home. Property owners across the city have raised their hand and supported the Empty Home Tax because it is fair, balanced and will help ensure their friends, family and kids can stay living here too.

Please help keep Santa Cruz vibrant and thriving by adopting the Empty Home Tax today! Yours sincerely,
Rebecca Cooper
___________________________
This email was sent by Rebecca Cooper via Do Gooder, a website that allows people to contact you regarding issues they consider important. In accordance with web protocol RFC 3834 we have set the FROM field of this email to our generic no‐reply address at [email protected], however Rebecca provided an email address ([email protected]) which we included in the REPLY‐TO field.

Please reply to Rebecca Cooper at [email protected].

To learn more about Do Gooder visit www.dogooder.co To learn more about web protocol RFC 3834 visit:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3834

41.70 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Sabina Holber <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2022 1:06 PM
To: Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; City Council
Cc: Bonnie Bush
Subject: Adopt the Empty Home Tax Now!
Dear Council,
Santa Cruz is in an affordable housing crisis! Our essential workers including teachers, healthcare workers, childcare providers and service workers cannot afford to live in our town. These workers are the engine of Santa Cruz's vibrant culture and economy. I am writing you today to urge you to take action today to adopt the community‐driven Empty Home Tax Ordinance.

Over 6000 residents of Santa Cruz signed the petition to support putting the Empty Home Tax on the ballot, but we don't have to wait for November. Recent numbers from the California Department of Finance report a 9% vacancy rate in Santa Cruz. Everyone in Santa Cruz has that house or houses in their neighborhood where no one every seems to be home. Property owners across the city have raised their hand and supported the Empty Home Tax because it is fair, balanced and will help ensure their friends, family and kids can stay living here too.

Please help keep Santa Cruz vibrant and thriving by adopting the Empty Home Tax today! Yours sincerely,
Sabina Holber
___________________________
This email was sent by Sabina Holber via Do Gooder, a website that allows people to contact you regarding issues they consider important. In accordance with web protocol RFC 3834 we have set the FROM field of this email to our generic no‐reply address at [email protected], however Sabina provided an email address ([email protected]) which we included in the REPLY‐TO field.

Please reply to Sabina Holber at [email protected].

To learn more about Do Gooder visit www.dogooder.co To learn more about web protocol RFC 3834 visit:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3834

41.71 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Theo Kell <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2022 1:16 PM
To: Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; City Council
Cc: Bonnie Bush
Subject: Adopt the Empty Home Tax Now!
Dear Councilmember,
Santa Cruz is in an affordable housing crisis! Our essential workers including teachers, healthcare workers, childcare providers and service workers cannot afford to live in our town. These workers are the engine of Santa Cruz's vibrant culture and economy. I am writing you today to urge you to take action today to adopt the community‐driven Empty Home Tax Ordinance.

Over 6000 residents of Santa Cruz signed the petition to support putting the Empty Home Tax on the ballot, but we don't have to wait for November. Recent numbers from the California Department of Finance report a 9% vacancy rate in Santa Cruz. Everyone in Santa Cruz has that house or houses in their neighborhood where no one every seems to be home. Property owners across the city have raised their hand and supported the Empty Home Tax because it is fair, balanced and will help ensure their friends, family and kids can stay living here too.

Please help keep Santa Cruz vibrant and thriving by adopting the Empty Home Tax today! Yours sincerely,
Theo Kell
___________________________
This email was sent by Theo Kell via Do Gooder, a website that allows people to contact you regarding issues they consider important. In accordance with web protocol RFC 3834 we have set the FROM field of this email to our generic no‐reply address at [email protected], however Theo provided an email address ([email protected]) which we included in the REPLY‐TO field.

Please reply to Theo Kell at [email protected].

To learn more about Do Gooder visit www.dogooder.co To learn more about web protocol RFC 3834 visit:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3834

41.72 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Owen Thomas <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2022 2:07 PM
To: Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; City Council
Cc: Bonnie Bush
Subject: Adopt the Empty Home Tax Now!
Dear Councilmember,
Santa Cruz is in an affordable housing crisis! Our essential workers including teachers, healthcare workers, childcare providers and service workers cannot afford to live in our town. These workers are the engine of Santa Cruz's vibrant culture and economy. I am writing you today to urge you to take action today to adopt the community‐driven Empty Home Tax Ordinance.

Over 6000 residents of Santa Cruz signed the petition to support putting the Empty Home Tax on the ballot, but we don't have to wait for November. Recent numbers from the California Department of Finance report a 9% vacancy rate in Santa Cruz. Everyone in Santa Cruz has that house or houses in their neighborhood where no one every seems to be home. Property owners across the city have raised their hand and supported the Empty Home Tax because it is fair, balanced and will help ensure their friends, family and kids can stay living here too.

Please help keep Santa Cruz vibrant and thriving by adopting the Empty Home Tax today! Yours sincerely,
Owen Thomas
___________________________
This email was sent by Owen Thomas via Do Gooder, a website that allows people to contact you regarding issues they consider important. In accordance with web protocol RFC 3834 we have set the FROM field of this email to our generic no‐reply address at [email protected], however Owen provided an email address ([email protected]) which we included in the REPLY‐TO field.

Please reply to Owen Thomas at [email protected].

To learn more about Do Gooder visit www.dogooder.co To learn more about web protocol RFC 3834 visit:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3834

41.73 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Lun Wang <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2022 7:06 PM
To: Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; City Council
Cc: Bonnie Bush
Subject: Adopt the Empty Home Tax Now!
Dear Councilmember
Santa Cruz is in an affordable housing crisis! Our essential workers including teachers, healthcare workers, childcare providers and service workers cannot afford to live in our town. These workers are the engine of Santa Cruz's vibrant culture and economy. I am writing you today to urge you to take action today to adopt the community‐driven Empty Home Tax Ordinance.

Over 6000 residents of Santa Cruz signed the petition to support putting the Empty Home Tax on the ballot, but we don't have to wait for November. Recent numbers from the California Department of Finance report a 9% vacancy rate in Santa Cruz. Everyone in Santa Cruz has that house or houses in their neighborhood where no one every seems to be home. Property owners across the city have raised their hand and supported the Empty Home Tax because it is fair, balanced and will help ensure their friends, family and kids can stay living here too.

Please help keep Santa Cruz vibrant and thriving by adopting the Empty Home Tax today! Yours sincerely,
Lun Wang
___________________________
This email was sent by Lun Wang via Do Gooder, a website that allows people to contact you regarding issues they consider important. In accordance with web protocol RFC 3834 we have set the FROM field of this email to our generic no‐reply address at [email protected], however Lun provided an email address ([email protected]) which we included in the REPLY‐TO field.

Please reply to Lun Wang at [email protected].

To learn more about Do Gooder visit www.dogooder.co To learn more about web protocol RFC 3834 visit:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3834

41.74 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Ian Keeler <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2022 7:07 PM
To: Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; City Council
Cc: Bonnie Bush
Subject: Adopt the Empty Home Tax Now!
Dear Councilmember
Santa Cruz is in an affordable housing crisis! Our essential workers including teachers, healthcare workers, childcare providers and service workers cannot afford to live in our town. These workers are the engine of Santa Cruz's vibrant culture and economy. I am writing you today to urge you to take action today to adopt the community‐driven Empty Home Tax Ordinance.

Over 6000 residents of Santa Cruz signed the petition to support putting the Empty Home Tax on the ballot, but we don't have to wait for November. Recent numbers from the California Department of Finance report a 9% vacancy rate in Santa Cruz. Everyone in Santa Cruz has that house or houses in their neighborhood where no one every seems to be home. Property owners across the city have raised their hand and supported the Empty Home Tax because it is fair, balanced and will help ensure their friends, family and kids can stay living here too.

Please help keep Santa Cruz vibrant and thriving by adopting the Empty Home Tax today! Yours sincerely,
Ian Keeler
___________________________
This email was sent by Ian Keeler via Do Gooder, a website that allows people to contact you regarding issues they consider important. In accordance with web protocol RFC 3834 we have set the FROM field of this email to our generic no‐reply address at [email protected], however Ian provided an email address ([email protected]) which we included in the REPLY‐TO field.

Please reply to Ian Keeler at [email protected].

To learn more about Do Gooder visit www.dogooder.co To learn more about web protocol RFC 3834 visit:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3834

41.75 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Julianne Weinzimmer <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2022 7:20 PM
To: Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; City Council
Cc: Bonnie Bush
Subject: We need the Empty Home Tax!
Dear Councilmember
Santa Cruz is in an affordable housing crisis! Our essential workers including teachers, healthcare workers, childcare providers and service workers cannot afford to live in our town. These workers are the engine of Santa Cruz's vibrant culture and economy. I am writing you today to urge you to take action today to adopt the community‐driven Empty Home Tax Ordinance.

Over 6000 residents of Santa Cruz signed the petition to support putting the Empty Home Tax on the ballot, but we don't have to wait for November. Recent numbers from the California Department of Finance report a 9% vacancy rate in Santa Cruz. Everyone in Santa Cruz has that house or houses in their neighborhood where no one every seems to be home. Property owners across the city have raised their hand and supported the Empty Home Tax because it is fair, balanced and will help ensure their friends, family and kids can stay living here too.

Please help keep Santa Cruz vibrant and thriving by adopting the Empty Home Tax today! ___________________________
This email was sent by Julianne Weinzimmer via Do Gooder, a website that allows people to contact you regarding issues they consider important. In accordance with web protocol RFC 3834 we have set the FROM field of this email to our generic no‐reply address at [email protected], however Julianne provided an email address ([email protected]) which we included in the REPLY‐TO field.

Please reply to Julianne Weinzimmer at [email protected].

To learn more about Do Gooder visit www.dogooder.co To learn more about web protocol RFC 3834 visit:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3834

41.76 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Joe Thompson <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2022 12:00 AM
To: Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; City Council
Cc: Bonnie Bush
Subject: We NEED affordable housing, adopt the Empty Home Tax NOW! Dear Council members,
Santa Cruz is in an affordable housing crisis! Our essential workers including teachers, healthcare workers, childcare providers and service workers cannot afford to live in our town. These workers are the engine of Santa Cruz's vibrant culture and economy. I am writing you today to urge you to take action today to adopt the community‐driven Empty Home Tax Ordinance. You can choose to adopt this grassroots, and people powered initiative or you can call for an expensive election. This is an amazing opportunity to directly use your power on city council to help students, essential workers, and everyone who needs affordable housing.

As a signature gather for this campaign, I assisted in collecting over 6000 signatures from residents of Santa Cruz, who signed this petition to show their support of the Empty Home Tax, but we don't have to wait for November. Recent numbers from the California Department of Finance report a 9% vacancy rate in Santa Cruz. Everyone in Santa Cruz has that house or houses in their neighborhood where no one every seems to be home. Property owners across the city have raised their hand and supported the Empty Home Tax because it is fair, balanced and will help ensure their friends, family and kids can stay living here too.

Please help keep Santa Cruz vibrant and thriving by adopting the Empty Home Tax today! Yours sincerely,
Joe Thompson
___________________________
This email was sent by Joe Thompson via Do Gooder, a website that allows people to contact you regarding issues they consider important. In accordance with web protocol RFC 3834 we have set the FROM field of this email to our generic no‐reply address at [email protected], however Joe provided an email address ([email protected]) which we included in the REPLY‐TO field.

Please reply to Joe Thompson at [email protected].

To learn more about Do Gooder visit www.dogooder.co To learn more about web protocol RFC 3834 visit:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3834

41.77 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Esther Centers <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2022 4:33 AM
To: Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; City Council
Cc: Bonnie Bush
Subject: Adopt the Empty Home Tax Now!
Dear Councilmember
Thank you for your service to Santa Cruz.

We need help to get out of this housing crisis. I am a teachers and struggle with housing, and see families moving because they can't make it here.

Healthcare workers, childcare providers and service workers cannot afford to live here either. These workers are fundamental to our economy.

I am writing you today to urge you to take action today to adopt the community‐driven Empty Home Tax Ordinance.

Over 6000 residents of Santa Cruz signed the petition to support putting the Empty Home Tax on the ballot, but we don't have to wait for November. Recent numbers from the California Department of Finance report a 9% vacancy rate in Santa Cruz. Everyone in Santa Cruz has that house or houses in their neighborhood where no one every seems to be home. Property owners across the city have raised their hand.

Please support the Empty Home Tax. It is fair, balanced and will help ensure that our friends, family and kids can stay living here.

Please help keep Santa Cruz vibrant and thriving by adopting the Empty Home Tax today! Yours sincerely,
Marcie Centers
___________________________
This email was sent by Esther Centers via Do Gooder, a website that allows people to contact you regarding issues they consider important. In accordance with web protocol RFC 3834 we have set the FROM field of this email to our generic no‐reply address at [email protected], however Esther provided an email address ([email protected]) which we included in the REPLY‐TO field.

Please reply to Esther Centers at [email protected].

To learn more about Do Gooder visit www.dogooder.co To learn more about web protocol RFC 3834 visit:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3834

41.78 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Syd Abad <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2022 3:08 PM
To: Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; City Council
Cc: Bonnie Bush
Subject: Adopt the Empty Home Tax Now!
Dear Councilmember
Santa Cruz is in an affordable housing crisis! Our essential workers including teachers, healthcare workers, childcare providers and service workers cannot afford to live in our town. These workers are the engine of Santa Cruz's vibrant culture and economy. I am writing you today to urge you to take action today to adopt the community‐driven Empty Home Tax Ordinance.

Over 6000 residents of Santa Cruz signed the petition to support putting the Empty Home Tax on the ballot, but we don't have to wait for November. Recent numbers from the California Department of Finance report a 9% vacancy rate in Santa Cruz. Everyone in Santa Cruz has that house or houses in their neighborhood where no one every seems to be home. Property owners across the city have raised their hand and supported the Empty Home Tax because it is fair, balanced and will help ensure their friends, family and kids can stay living here too.

Please help keep Santa Cruz vibrant and thriving by adopting the Empty Home Tax today! ___________________________
This email was sent by Syd Abad via Do Gooder, a website that allows people to contact you regarding issues they consider important. In accordance with web protocol RFC 3834 we have set the FROM field of this email to our generic no‐reply address at [email protected], however Syd provided an email address ([email protected]) which we included in the REPLY‐TO field.

Please reply to Syd Abad at [email protected].

To learn more about Do Gooder visit www.dogooder.co To learn more about web protocol RFC 3834 visit:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3834

41.79 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Jessica Evans Evans <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2022 4:16 PM
To: Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; City Council
Cc: Bonnie Bush
Subject: I am an Empty Home Tax Supporter
Dear Councilmember
I am writing you today to urge you to adopt the Empty Home Tax Ordinance today. There is a 9% vacancy rate in Santa Cruz. As a community, that is not sustainable. I was one of the over 6000 residents of Santa Cruz who signed the petition to support putting the Empty Home Tax. The tax is now on the ballot, but we don't have to wait for November to implement it.

Please help keep Santa Cruz vibrant and thriving by adopting the Empty Home Tax today! Yours sincerely,
Jessica Evans
___________________________
This email was sent by Jessica Evans Evans via Do Gooder, a website that allows people to contact you regarding issues they consider important. In accordance with web protocol RFC 3834 we have set the FROM field of this email to our generic no‐reply address at [email protected], however Jessica Evans provided an email address ([email protected]) which we included in the REPLY‐TO field.

Please reply to Jessica Evans Evans at [email protected].

To learn more about Do Gooder visit www.dogooder.co To learn more about web protocol RFC 3834 visit:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3834

41.80 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Tabby Cat <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2022 4:45 PM
To: Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; City Council
Cc: Bonnie Bush
Subject: Adopt the Empty Home Tax Now!
Dear Councilmember
Santa Cruz is in an affordable housing crisis! Our essential workers including teachers, healthcare workers, childcare providers and service workers cannot afford to live in our town. These workers are the engine of Santa Cruz's vibrant culture and economy. I am writing you today to urge you to take action today to adopt the community‐driven Empty Home Tax Ordinance.

Over 6000 residents of Santa Cruz signed the petition to support putting the Empty Home Tax on the ballot, but we don't have to wait for November. Recent numbers from the California Department of Finance report a 9% vacancy rate in Santa Cruz. Everyone in Santa Cruz has that house or houses in their neighborhood where no one every seems to be home. Property owners across the city have raised their hand and supported the Empty Home Tax because it is fair, balanced and will help ensure their friends, family and kids can stay living here too.

Please help keep Santa Cruz vibrant and thriving by adopting the Empty Home Tax today! Yours sincerely,
Tabby Cat
___________________________
This email was sent by Tabby Cat via Do Gooder, a website that allows people to contact you regarding issues they consider important. In accordance with web protocol RFC 3834 we have set the FROM field of this email to our generic no‐reply address at [email protected], however Tabby provided an email address ([email protected]) which we included in the REPLY‐TO field.

Please reply to Tabby Cat at [email protected].

To learn more about Do Gooder visit www.dogooder.co To learn more about web protocol RFC 3834 visit:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3834

41.81 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Krista Corwin <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2022 5:10 PM
To: Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; City Council
Cc: Bonnie Bush
Subject: Support for the empty home tax
Dear Councilmembers,
I support the Empty Home Tax. Please pass the empty home tax at your next meeting. Empty homeowners hoard & sequester scarce housing space away from Santa Cruzans, forcing all of us to take on even more in housing costs than we really need to.

Incentivize empty homeowners to fill their homes with renters who will be present in the community and will contribute to the local economy.

Don't wait til November & don't waste staff time & resources when you could step up and do what is needed right now.

WHO CARES if homeowners have to fill out an audit every year? It can't be any more burdensome than filing your taxes or paying property taxes online. Pass the Empty Home Tax.

Thank you,
Krista
___________________________
This email was sent by Krista Corwin via Do Gooder, a website that allows people to contact you regarding issues they consider important. In accordance with web protocol RFC 3834 we have set the FROM field of this email to our generic no‐reply address at [email protected], however Krista provided an email address ([email protected]) which we included in the REPLY‐TO field.

Please reply to Krista Corwin at [email protected].

To learn more about Do Gooder visit www.dogooder.co To learn more about web protocol RFC 3834 visit:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3834

41.82 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Ann Simonton <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, June 24, 2022 11:32 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Our Downtown Our Future
Dear Council Members,
I support your placing Our Downtown, Our Future’s measure on the ballot for November. We need to allow the voters to decide this vital issue. Please insist that the consultant who analyzes the Our Downtown, Our Future ballot initiative be entirely objective. To do so, it simultaneously needs to investigate the City’s proposed garage-library-housing proposal. Specifically, we need a realistic project timeline, especially for securing garage bond financing by the City, given that the Downtown Parking District is years away from achieving a surplus of revenue over expenditures. Please also ask the consultant to fully investigate the City staff projections for paying the bond debt on the garage, including projections of future parking demand. This is why we need this on our ballot. Thank you for your service to be a voice for our ENTIRE community.

Sincerely, Ann Simonton

41.83 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: David Robinson <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, June 24, 2022 1:10 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Re-building our downtown public library
Dear Council Members,

I support your placing Our Downtown, Our Future’s measure on the ballot for November. We need to have voters decide. Please insist that the consultant who analyzes the Our Downtown, Our Future ballot initiative be entirely objective. To do so, it simultaneously needs investigate the City’s proposed garage-library-housing proposal.

Specifically, we need a realistic project timeline, especially for securing garage bond financing by the City, given that the Downtown Parking District is years away from achieving a surplus of revenue over expenditures. Please also ask the consultant to critique the City staff projections for paying the bond debt on the garage, including projections of future parking demand.

Thank you,
David Robinson
215 Weeks Avenue
Santa Cruz, California
95060
831-226-6858
Sent from AT&T Yahoo Mail for iPhone

41.84 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: James Mulherin <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, June 24, 2022 3:34 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Put vote on downtown Farmers Mk and special housing by citizens on the ballot Dear Council Members,
I support your placing Our Downtown, Our Future’s measure on the ballot for November. We need to have voters decide. Please insist that the consultant who analyzes the Our Downtown, Our Future ballot initiative be entirely objective. To do so, it simultaneously needs to investigate the City’s proposed garage-library-housing proposal.

Thank you,
James Mulherin

41.85 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Mel & Vicki Nunez <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, June 24, 2022 5:42 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Respecting Voters
Dear Council Members,
Please join us in support of placing Our Downtown Our Future's measure on our November ballot.

We are 50 year residents of Santa Cruz who voted for measure S six years ago,since we support the renovation of the central library and other branches.Unfortunately,we were deceived.

The expanded garage-housing-library proposal was never
suggested to be a result of our approval of measure S!
How is this project to be financed? Is repaying new bond debt from parking revenue even possible?
We need an honest,realistic and public decision making
opportunity, which the Our Downtown,Our Future ballot
measure provides. Thanks for listening.

Very Sincerely,Mel & Vicki Nunez.

41.86 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: leonie sherman <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, June 25, 2022 7:02 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Please put the Our Downtown, Our Future measure on the ballot Dear esteemed city council members,
Please put this measure on the ballot so the people you represent can decide what they want Santa Cruz to look like in the future.

I know you have devoted years to coming up with a plan for that parking lot and probably think the city’s proposal is the best you can come up with.

But if you want to earn the trust and respect of the people you represent, please allow them to vote on this ballot measure and decide for themselves. You don’t need yo support the ballot measure, but you do need to support democracy in order to be worthy of your position on city council.

Thank you so much for your consideration, Leonie Sherman 831‐588‐9545
When you count your blessings they multiply

41.87 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Devi Tong <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, June 26, 2022 11:07 AM
To: City Council
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Save the Farmers Market/Community Gathering Area Dear Council Members,
Please resist the waste of resources, money and time by not supporting the demolition of our current library, and the building of a large parking project that is not needed in our town. Please focus on Affordable housing above current public parking lots and beautifying the commons area to preserve and increase the livability of our downtown.

I support your placing Our Downtown, Our Future’s measure on the ballot for November.

Thank you,
Devi Tong RNb

41.88 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Sara Bassler <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, June 26, 2022 10:57 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Our Downtown, Our Future Ballot Measure
Dear Council Members,
I am a resident and a voter in the city of Santa Cruz. I support Our Downtown, Our Future’s ballot measure being on the ballot for November. We need to have voters decide.

If you are going to have a consultant analyze the Our Downtown, Our Future (ODOF) ballot initiative, then that consultant must be entirely objective.

In order to be objective, the consultant must also investigate the City’s proposed garage‐ library‐housing proposal so the consultant can understand and compare it with ODOF’s ballot measure which does not exist in a vacuum.

Specifically, the consultant must consider the garage‐library‐housing project timeline, including the time needed for securing garage bond financing by the City. The consultant must consider that the Downtown Parking District is years away from achieving a surplus of revenue over expenditures and thus is years away from being able to make any payments on a bond.

How does this impact the ability to pay for the garage and housing project? The consultant must also evaluate the City staff projections for paying the bond debt on the garage, including projections of future parking demand.

Finally, among the other positive aspects of Our Downtown Our Future the consultant must consider the positive impact of saving 10 Heritage trees in terms of how trees fight climate change, how they positively impact human physical and mental health, and the more recent knowledge about how trees form a community and communicate with each other. (see Finding the Mother Tree: Discovering the Wisdom of the Forest by Suzanne Simard).

Thank you for considering my comments.
‐Sara Bassler

41.89 2
Sent from Mail for Windows

41.90 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: John Hall <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2022 11:35 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Our Downtown, Our Future ballot measure
Dear Mayor and Council members,
I support your placing Our Downtown, Our Future’s measure on the ballot for November. We need to have voters decide. Please insist that the consultant who analyzes the Our Downtown, Our Future ballot initiative be entirely objective. To do so, it simultaneously needs investigate the City’s proposed garage-libraryhousing proposal. Specifically, we need a realistic project timeline, especially for securing garage bond financing by the City, given that the Downtown Parking District is years away from achieving a surplus of revenue over expenditures. Please also ask the consultant to critique the City staff projections for paying the bond debt on the garage, including projections of future parking demand.

Thank you,
John Hall
https://www.ourdowntownourfuture.org
Climate Change Calling,
Part I: https://sanatione.iyms.org/2021/9-climate-change-calling/ Part II: https://sanatione.iyms.org/2021/9-climate-change-calling/ John Hall
[email protected]

41.91 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Deborah Peronto <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2022 1:20 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Support for Extending Deadline for Impact Study of DT Library City Council Members,
I strongly urge you to support extending the deadline for the impact study of the ODOF proposed library. I am very concerned about the potential loss of affordable housing downtown as the pandemic has increased the number of unhoused people in Santa Cruz County.

I am also concerned about the loss of services to those in our community who need them the most for the 2-3 years during a rebuild. The supporters of ODOF are some of the wealthiest in the community who do not use the library or it's services. Please take the time to complete a good study to allow the voters with some valuable data to make their decisions when they vote.

Thank you for your time and attention,
Debby Peronto

41.92 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Polhamus <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2022 1:51 PM
To: City Council
Subject: I support the extended deadline, #41
Dear Mayor Brunner and City Council Members:

I am writing to express support for extending the deadline for the impact report of the Our Downtown, Our Future initiative which will be placed on the November ballot. It is critical for all of us to understand the implications that passing this initiative would have, both fiscal and logistical, as it would impact not only the future of the mixed use library (which I support), but will result in significant delays and may compromise the funding for the library project. I am also concerned about the land use decisions contained in the initiative, and would like to understand better the implications of these decisions. Thank you for voting to extend the deadline so that we can receive this valuable information.

Thank you for your service to our city.

Yours,
Carol Polhamus

41.93 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Martha Dexter <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2022 2:22 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Extend the deadline for the impact report on the Our Downtown Our Future measure Hello,
I write to urge you to extend the deadline for the impact report on the Our Downtown Our Future measure. It is critical that we have a good understanding of the full implications of this measure -- especially with regard to the loss of affordable housing currently in the pipeline and the much reduced size and suitability of the Downtown Library, not to mention critical delays to the library project that could put it in jeopardy.

Thank you,
Martha Dexter
Former member Library Joint Powers Board
Former member Downtown Library Advisory Committee
Former member Library Advisory Commission

41.94 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Katie Fortney <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2022 2:36 PM
To: City Council
Subject: ODOF initiative - report deadline
Good afternoon City Council,
Please extend the deadline for the report on the impact of the ODOF initiative, as part of item #41 on tomorrow's agenda. The initiative is misguided, and if it passes the impacts on affordable housing downtown could be complex. The consequences to the thoughtful, researched, well-reasoned plans for the mixed use library that have been making such great progress would be terrible.

The author of the report should have the opportunity to be thorough so that the report can be used to debunk half truths and misleading statements ODOF may make as the election approaches. When someone tried to get me to sign the petition in the spring they asked me if I wanted to "protect trees," and only admitted the measure was trying to stop our wonderful new library when I questioned them. This cannot go on.

Best regards,
Katie Fortney

41.95 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Janis O'Driscoll <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2022 4:33 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Full Report on the Impacts of ODOF Initiative
Council Members:

The Friends of the Santa Cruz Public Libraries support the need to have ALL of the facts about the impacts of the ODOF initiative that will stop a critical project that provides affordable housing, child care, and exceptional information services in Downtown Santa Cruz.

Please support the request for a report on the full scope of the initiative's impact with a revised deadline of September 27 at the upcoming council meeting. (item #41) We need complete information to make good decisions.

Thank you.

Janis O'Driscoll
President, Board of the Friends of the Santa Cruz Public Libraries

41.96 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Diane Sipkin <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2022 4:46 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Support for extended deadline for ODOF impact Report To members of the City Council:

I am fully in favor of the completion of the Library Affordable Housing project as proposed.

Therefore, I support the extended deadline for the ODOF impact report in order to get a full picture of its implications, including loss of affordable housing, delays and compromised plans for the Downtown Library, and impacts on our downtown.

Thank you,
Diane Sipkin
Lower Westside Santa Cruz

41.97 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Dennis <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2022 4:48 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Extend the ODOF deadline for the downtown library I am a retired librarian and MBA with extensive experience in the construction of large libraries and the renovation of historic buildings.

I am fully in favor of the completion of the Library Affordable Housing project as proposed. Therefore, I support the extended deadline for the ODOF impact report in order to get a full picture of its implications, including loss of affordable housing, delays and compromised plans for the Downtown Library, and impacts on our downtown.

Dennis Hagen
Lower Westside

41.98 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Polhamus <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, June 24, 2022 9:27 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Empty Home Tax - put it on the ballot
Dear Mayor Brunner and City Council Members:

I am writing to request that you put the Empty Home Tax initiative on the ballot rather than adopt it.

Who is against affordable housing? No one. But the Empty Home Tax initiative will not get us any closer to creating affordable housing for the following reasons:
1) The estimates of vacancy rates are exceedingly high, the reality will probably be at least 90% lower.
2) The costs of the program are unlimited.
3) Only 15% of the costs incurred can be paid from the tax collected, the rest must come from the city's general fund.
4) The EHT will require every homeowner every year to report to the city their residency status, a "big brother" style invasion of privacy that will require city oversight and a new bureaucracy to manage it.
5) The committee included in the EHT should be appointed, like every other commission/committee in the city is, by application and council vote.
6) Even though the EHT claims all the tax monies collected will be used for affordable housing, a closer study reveals that a unnamed portion of the funding will be used to support the committee, 5% will be used for "homeless sanitation", and 15% for program administration. As the cost of ONE unit of affordable housing is now approaching $650,000, once you do the math on the potential income and subtract the estimated expenses, it appears that the impact on our affordable housing stock will be negligible, while costing the city a large amount of money every year from our general fund, impacting city services.

In this particular time, when the sales tax measure appears to be headed for defeat, adopting this flawed initiative (that according to the city staff's figures would cost the city $600,000 in its first year to be paid from an already depleted general fund) would be irresponsible. Let the voters decide if they want this ineffective, invasive program to be adopted. Put it on the ballot.

Thank you for listening and for your service to our city.

Carol Polhamus

41.99 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Tabby Cat <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2022 4:45 PM
To: Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; City Council
Cc: Bonnie Bush
Subject: Adopt the Empty Home Tax Now!
Dear Councilmember
Santa Cruz is in an affordable housing crisis! Our essential workers including teachers, healthcare workers, childcare providers and service workers cannot afford to live in our town. These workers are the engine of Santa Cruz's vibrant culture and economy. I am writing you today to urge you to take action today to adopt the community‐driven Empty Home Tax Ordinance.

Over 6000 residents of Santa Cruz signed the petition to support putting the Empty Home Tax on the ballot, but we don't have to wait for November. Recent numbers from the California Department of Finance report a 9% vacancy rate in Santa Cruz. Everyone in Santa Cruz has that house or houses in their neighborhood where no one every seems to be home. Property owners across the city have raised their hand and supported the Empty Home Tax because it is fair, balanced and will help ensure their friends, family and kids can stay living here too.

Please reply to Tabby Cat at [email protected].

To learn more about Do Gooder visit www.dogooder.co To learn more about web protocol RFC 3834 visit:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3834

41.100
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Eric Rowland <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, June 25, 2022 7:46 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Reject the EHT!
Dear Council,
I'm writing regarding the "Empty Homes Tax", and urge you not to support it. It's wrong on so many levels.

Requiring ALL property owners to declare where they've been during the year? Assuming guilt until one proves innocence?
A governing board consisting of no-one who would pay the tax? Allowing non-elected citizens to decide who will pay, without recourse? Please say NO.

Regards,
Eric Rowland

41.101
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Erin Wood <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, June 26, 2022 11:49 AM
To: City Council
Subject: In support of an Empty Home Tax
I am fully in support of an empty home tax. The folks who did the research and organized the campaign are some of the most thoughtful and compassionate people in the county and we need something like this to make the city better for all of us. More housing, more sanitation, more economic justice. Thanks for your time and attention to this tax that could really turn the tides in a good way here in Santa Cruz. ~Erin Wood, L.Ac.
“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

41.102
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Kevin Norton <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, June 24, 2022 12:25 PM
To: Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; City Council
Cc: Bonnie Bush
Subject: Adopt the Empty Home Tax Now! Don't wait - Rent prices are outrageous in SC...

Dear Councilmember
Santa Cruz is in an affordable housing crisis! Our essential workers including teachers, healthcare workers, childcare providers and service workers cannot afford to live in our town. These workers are the engine of Santa Cruz's vibrant culture and economy. I am writing you today to urge you to take action today to adopt the community‐driven Empty Home Tax Ordinance.

Over 6000 residents of Santa Cruz signed the petition to support putting the Empty Home Tax on the ballot, but we don't have to wait for November. Recent numbers from the California Department of Finance report a 9% vacancy rate in Santa Cruz. Everyone in Santa Cruz has that house or houses in their neighborhood where no one every seems to be home. Property owners across the city have raised their hand and supported the Empty Home Tax because it is fair, balanced and will help ensure their friends, family and kids can stay living here too.

Please help keep Santa Cruz vibrant and thriving by adopting the Empty Home Tax today! Yours sincerely,
Kevin Norton
___________________________
This email was sent by Kevin Norton via Do Gooder, a website that allows people to contact you regarding issues they consider important. In accordance with web protocol RFC 3834 we have set the FROM field of this email to our generic no‐reply address at [email protected], however Kevin provided an email address ([email protected]) which we included in the REPLY‐TO field.

Please reply to Kevin Norton at [email protected].

To learn more about Do Gooder visit www.dogooder.co To learn more about web protocol RFC 3834 visit:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3834

41.103
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Janine R <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, June 25, 2022 6:31 PM
To: Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; City Council
Cc: Bonnie Bush
Subject: Support the Empty Home Tax Now!
Dear Mayor, Vice Mayor and Councilmembers,
The Impact Report for the Empty Homes Tax is compelling ‐ $2.5‐$4 million! This is an opportunity to have some $$ for affordable housing, especially since the recent City sales tax failed to pass in June.

Santa Cruz is in an affordable housing crisis! Our essential workers including teachers, healthcare workers, childcare providers and service workers cannot afford to live in our town. These workers are the engine of Santa Cruz's vibrant culture and economy. I am writing you today to urge you to take action today to publicly support the community‐driven Empty Home Tax Ordinance.

Over 6000 residents of Santa Cruz signed the petition to support putting the Empty Home Tax on the ballot, but we don't have to wait for November. Recent numbers from the California Department of Finance report a 9% vacancy rate in Santa Cruz. Everyone in Santa Cruz has that house or houses in their neighborhood where no one every seems to be home. Property owners across the city have raised their hand and supported the Empty Home Tax because it is fair, balanced and will help ensure their friends, family and kids can stay living here too.

Please help keep Santa Cruz vibrant and support the Empty Home Tax today! Yours sincerely,
Janine R
___________________________
This email was sent by Janine R via Do Gooder, a website that allows people to contact you regarding issues they consider important. In accordance with web protocol RFC 3834 we have set the FROM field of this email to our generic no‐reply address at [email protected], however Janine provided an email address ([email protected]) which we included in the REPLY‐TO field.

Please reply to Janine R at [email protected].

To learn more about Do Gooder visit www.dogooder.co To learn more about web protocol RFC 3834 visit:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3834

41.104
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Marissa Maciel <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, June 25, 2022 8:18 PM
To: Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; City Council
Cc: Bonnie Bush
Subject: Support the Empty Home Tax!
Dear Councilmember
Santa Cruz is in an affordable housing crisis! Our essential workers including teachers, healthcare workers, childcare providers and service workers cannot afford to live in our town. These workers are the engine of Santa Cruz's vibrant culture and economy. I am writing you today to urge you to take action today to publicly support the community‐driven Empty Home Tax Ordinance.

Over 6000 residents of Santa Cruz signed the petition to support putting the Empty Home Tax on the ballot, but we don't have to wait for November. Recent numbers from the California Department of Finance report a 9% vacancy rate in Santa Cruz. Everyone in Santa Cruz has that house or houses in their neighborhood where no one every seems to be home. Property owners across the city have raised their hand and supported the Empty Home Tax because it is fair, balanced and will help ensure their friends, family and kids can stay living here too.

Please help keep Santa Cruz vibrant and support the Empty Home Tax today! Yours sincerely,
Marissa Maciel
___________________________
This email was sent by Marissa Maciel via Do Gooder, a website that allows people to contact you regarding issues they consider important. In accordance with web protocol RFC 3834 we have set the FROM field of this email to our generic no‐reply address at [email protected], however Marissa provided an email address ([email protected]) which we included in the REPLY‐TO field.

Please reply to Marissa Maciel at [email protected].

To learn more about Do Gooder visit www.dogooder.co To learn more about web protocol RFC 3834 visit:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3834

41.105
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Krista Myers <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, June 25, 2022 8:30 PM
To: Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; City Council
Cc: Bonnie Bush
Subject: Support the Empty Home Tax Now!
Dear Councilmember
Santa Cruz is in an affordable housing crisis! Our essential workers including teachers, healthcare workers, childcare providers and service workers cannot afford to live in our town. These workers are the engine of Santa Cruz's vibrant culture and economy. I am writing you today to urge you to take action today to publicly support the community‐driven Empty Home Tax Ordinance. I myself am a 30 year old renter with a Masters degree, and the idea of ever owning a home in the community I love has all but evaporated in the last 2 years.

Over 6000 residents of Santa Cruz signed the petition to support putting the Empty Home Tax on the ballot, but we don't have to wait for November. Recent numbers from the California Department of Finance report a 9% vacancy rate in Santa Cruz. Everyone in Santa Cruz has that house or houses in their neighborhood where no one every seems to be home. Property owners across the city have raised their hand and supported the Empty Home Tax because it is fair, balanced and will help ensure their friends, family and kids can stay living here too.

Please help keep Santa Cruz vibrant and support the Empty Home Tax today! Yours sincerely,
Krista Myers
___________________________
This email was sent by Krista Myers via Do Gooder, a website that allows people to contact you regarding issues they consider important. In accordance with web protocol RFC 3834 we have set the FROM field of this email to our generic no‐reply address at [email protected], however Krista provided an email address ([email protected]) which we included in the REPLY‐TO field.

Please reply to Krista Myers at [email protected].

To learn more about Do Gooder visit www.dogooder.co To learn more about web protocol RFC 3834 visit:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3834

41.106
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Jody Colclough <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, June 25, 2022 10:03 PM
To: Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; City Council
Cc: Bonnie Bush
Subject: Support the Empty Home Tax Now!
Dear Councilmember‐
I am writing you today to urge you to take action today to publicly support the community‐driven Empty Home Tax Ordinance.

Over 6000 residents of Santa Cruz signed the petition to support putting the Empty Home Tax on the ballot, but we don't have to wait for November. Recent numbers from the California Department of Finance report a 9% vacancy rate in Santa Cruz. Everyone in Santa Cruz has that house or houses in their neighborhood where no one every seems to be home. Property owners across the city have raised their hand and supported the Empty Home Tax because it is fair, balanced and will help ensure their friends, family and kids can stay living here too.

Please help keep Santa Cruz vibrant and support the Empty Home Tax today! Thank you!
Jody
___________________________
This email was sent by Jody Colclough via Do Gooder, a website that allows people to contact you regarding issues they consider important. In accordance with web protocol RFC 3834 we have set the FROM field of this email to our generic no‐reply address at [email protected], however Jody provided an email address ([email protected]) which we included in the REPLY‐TO field.

Please reply to Jody Colclough at [email protected].

To learn more about Do Gooder visit www.dogooder.co To learn more about web protocol RFC 3834 visit:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3834

41.107
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Joy Parker <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, June 25, 2022 10:57 PM
To: Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; City Council
Cc: Bonnie Bush
Subject: Support the Empty Home Tax Now!
Dear Councilmember
Santa Cruz is in an affordable housing crisis! Our essential workers including teachers, healthcare workers, childcare providers and service workers cannot afford to live in our town. These workers are the engine of Santa Cruz's vibrant culture and economy. I am writing you today to urge you to take action today to publicly support the community‐driven Empty Home Tax Ordinance.

Over 6000 residents of Santa Cruz signed the petition to support putting the Empty Home Tax on the ballot, but we don't have to wait for November. Recent numbers from the California Department of Finance report a 9% vacancy rate in Santa Cruz. Everyone in Santa Cruz has that house or houses in their neighborhood where no one every seems to be home. Property owners across the city have raised their hand and supported the Empty Home Tax because it is fair, balanced and will help ensure their friends, family and kids can stay living here too.

Please help keep Santa Cruz vibrant and support the Empty Home Tax today! Yours sincerely,
Joy Parker
___________________________
This email was sent by Joy Parker via Do Gooder, a website that allows people to contact you regarding issues they consider important. In accordance with web protocol RFC 3834 we have set the FROM field of this email to our generic no‐reply address at [email protected], however Joy provided an email address ([email protected]) which we included in the REPLY‐TO field.

Please reply to Joy Parker at [email protected].

To learn more about Do Gooder visit www.dogooder.co To learn more about web protocol RFC 3834 visit:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3834

41.108
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Lena Plett <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, June 26, 2022 4:43 PM
To: Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; City Council
Cc: Bonnie Bush
Subject: Support the Empty Home Tax Now!
Dear Councilmember
Santa Cruz is in an affordable housing crisis! Our essential workers including teachers, healthcare workers, childcare providers and service workers cannot afford to live in our town. These workers are the engine of Santa Cruz's vibrant culture and economy. I am writing you today to urge you to take action today to publicly support the community‐driven Empty Home Tax Ordinance.

Over 6000 residents of Santa Cruz signed the petition to support putting the Empty Home Tax on the ballot, but we don't have to wait for November. Recent numbers from the California Department of Finance report a 9% vacancy rate in Santa Cruz. Everyone in Santa Cruz has that house or houses in their neighborhood where no one every seems to be home. Property owners across the city have raised their hand and supported the Empty Home Tax because it is fair, balanced and will help ensure their friends, family and kids can stay living here too.

Please help keep Santa Cruz vibrant and support the Empty Home Tax today! Yours sincerely,
Lena Plett
___________________________
This email was sent by Lena Plett via Do Gooder, a website that allows people to contact you regarding issues they consider important. In accordance with web protocol RFC 3834 we have set the FROM field of this email to our generic no‐reply address at [email protected], however Lena provided an email address ([email protected]) which we included in the REPLY‐TO field.

Please reply to Lena Plett at [email protected].

To learn more about Do Gooder visit www.dogooder.co To learn more about web protocol RFC 3834 visit:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3834

41.109
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Cecil Runyon <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, June 26, 2022 5:43 PM
To: Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; City Council
Cc: Bonnie Bush
Subject: Support the Empty Home Tax Now!
Dear Councilmember,
Although this is a pre‐made message, it is worded better than I ever could and I fully support it. Thank you.

Santa Cruz is in an affordable housing crisis! Our essential workers including teachers, healthcare workers, childcare providers and service workers cannot afford to live in our town. These workers are the engine of Santa Cruz's vibrant culture and economy. I am writing you today to urge you to take action today to publicly support the community‐driven Empty Home Tax Ordinance.

Over 6000 residents of Santa Cruz signed the petition to support putting the Empty Home Tax on the ballot, but we don't have to wait for November. Recent numbers from the California Department of Finance report a 9% vacancy rate in Santa Cruz. Everyone in Santa Cruz has that house or houses in their neighborhood where no one every seems to be home. Property owners across the city have raised their hand and supported the Empty Home Tax because it is fair, balanced and will help ensure their friends, family and kids can stay living here too.

Please help keep Santa Cruz vibrant and support the Empty Home Tax today! Yours sincerely,
Cecil Runyon
___________________________
This email was sent by Cecil Runyon via Do Gooder, a website that allows people to contact you regarding issues they consider important. In accordance with web protocol RFC 3834 we have set the FROM field of this email to our generic no‐reply address at [email protected], however Cecil provided an email address ([email protected]) which we included in the REPLY‐TO field.

Please reply to Cecil Runyon at [email protected].

To learn more about Do Gooder visit www.dogooder.co To learn more about web protocol RFC 3834 visit:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3834

41.110
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Sapphire Roth <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, June 26, 2022 5:45 PM
To: Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; City Council
Cc: Bonnie Bush
Subject: Support the Empty Home Tax Now!
Dear Councilmember
Santa Cruz is in an affordable housing crisis! Our essential workers including teachers, healthcare workers, childcare providers and service workers cannot afford to live in our town. These workers are the engine of Santa Cruz's vibrant culture and economy. I am writing you today to urge you to take action today to publicly support the community‐driven Empty Home Tax Ordinance.

Over 6000 residents of Santa Cruz signed the petition to support putting the Empty Home Tax on the ballot, but we don't have to wait for November. Recent numbers from the California Department of Finance report a 9% vacancy rate in Santa Cruz. Everyone in Santa Cruz has that house or houses in their neighborhood where no one every seems to be home. Property owners across the city have raised their hand and supported the Empty Home Tax because it is fair, balanced and will help ensure their friends, family and kids can stay living here too.

Please help keep Santa Cruz vibrant and support the Empty Home Tax today! Yours sincerely,
Sapphire Roth
___________________________
This email was sent by Sapphire Roth via Do Gooder, a website that allows people to contact you regarding issues they consider important. In accordance with web protocol RFC 3834 we have set the FROM field of this email to our generic no‐reply address at [email protected], however Sapphire provided an email address ([email protected]) which we included in the REPLY‐TO field.

Please reply to Sapphire Roth at [email protected].

To learn more about Do Gooder visit www.dogooder.co To learn more about web protocol RFC 3834 visit:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3834

41.111
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Sophia Mount <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, June 26, 2022 7:09 PM
To: Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; City Council
Cc: Bonnie Bush
Subject: Support the Empty Home Tax Now!
Dear Councilmember
Santa Cruz is in an affordable housing crisis! Our essential workers including teachers, healthcare workers, childcare providers and service workers cannot afford to live in our town. These workers are the engine of Santa Cruz's vibrant culture and economy. I am writing you today to urge you to take action today to publicly support the community‐driven Empty Home Tax Ordinance.

Over 6000 residents of Santa Cruz signed the petition to support putting the Empty Home Tax on the ballot, but we don't have to wait for November. Recent numbers from the California Department of Finance report a 9% vacancy rate in Santa Cruz. Everyone in Santa Cruz has that house or houses in their neighborhood where no one every seems to be home. Property owners across the city have raised their hand and supported the Empty Home Tax because it is fair, balanced and will help ensure their friends, family and kids can stay living here too.

Please help keep Santa Cruz vibrant and support the Empty Home Tax today! Yours sincerely,
Sophia Mount
___________________________
This email was sent by Sophia Mount via Do Gooder, a website that allows people to contact you regarding issues they consider important. In accordance with web protocol RFC 3834 we have set the FROM field of this email to our generic no‐reply address at [email protected], however Sophia provided an email address ([email protected]) which we included in the REPLY‐TO field.

Please reply to Sophia Mount at [email protected].

To learn more about Do Gooder visit www.dogooder.co To learn more about web protocol RFC 3834 visit:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3834

41.112
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Theodore Krause <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, June 26, 2022 7:27 PM
To: Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; City Council
Cc: Bonnie Bush
Subject: Support the Empty Home Tax Now!
Dear City Council,
Santa Cruz is in an affordable housing crisis! Our essential workers including teachers, healthcare workers, childcare providers and service workers cannot afford to live in our town. These workers are the engine of Santa Cruz's vibrant culture and economy. I am writing you today to urge you to take action today to publicly support the community‐driven Empty Home Tax Ordinance.

Over 6000 residents of Santa Cruz signed the petition to support putting the Empty Home Tax on the ballot, but we don't have to wait for November. Recent numbers from the California Department of Finance report a 9% vacancy rate in Santa Cruz. Speaking personally for a moment, my family had full time neighbors for around 10 years. Then the landlord's inlaws wanted a vacation spot, and now that house is empty 9 months out the year. I've watched property after property go from a home to an asset, all around the city. My friends and coworkers are being priced out at an unsustainable rate‐ some of them drive from watsonville just to work grocery downtown. We're underpaid, sure, but Santa Cruz is less affordable per capita than Brooklyn, and I know which one I'd rather be scraping by in.

Please help keep Santa Cruz vibrant and support the Empty Home Tax today! Yours sincerely,
Theodore Krause
___________________________
This email was sent by Theodore Krause via Do Gooder, a website that allows people to contact you regarding issues they consider important. In accordance with web protocol RFC 3834 we have set the FROM field of this email to our generic no‐reply address at [email protected], however Theodore provided an email address ([email protected]) which we included in the REPLY‐TO field.

Please reply to Theodore Krause at [email protected].

To learn more about Do Gooder visit www.dogooder.co To learn more about web protocol RFC 3834 visit:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3834

41.113
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: [email protected]
Sent: Sunday, June 26, 2022 8:58 PM
To: Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder
Cc: Bonnie Bush; City Council
Subject: Item 41- Empty Home Tax Fiscal Impact Report Misses the Mark Letter to Council on Fiscal Impact Report (report starts on page 3) sent 6/26/22 Dear Councilmembers‐
We would like to thank you and city staff for compiling a Fiscal Impact report for the Empty Home Tax ordinance. Empty Home Tax is bringing part of the solution to our affordability crisis, and it is imperative the public have accurate information to inform their decision in November. Unfortunately, the Fiscal Impact report is missing some critical analyses and contains information that is factually incorrect. The over 6000 voters who signed our petition urge you to correct these errors before accepting this report into the public record.  The revenue estimate is significantly underestimated. There is no attempt made to estimate the number of vacant units on parcels with 7 or more dwelling units. Those units are required to declare occupancy individually. According to data from the County Assessor Records there are over 400 parcels with 7 or more units. Providing some estimates related to revenue from empty units on these parcels is needed. Also there is almost no detail provided on the methods used to calculate the revenue estimate, no detail on the assumptions used is provided. Recently released numbers from the CA Department of Finance report over 2000 vacant homes which is significantly higher than what is included in report. The report should directly address this discrepancy and provide sufficient detail of the methods used in the calculation so it can be critically evaluated by outside experts.

Source: https://dof.ca.gov/forecasting/Demographics/estimates/e‐5‐population‐and‐housing‐estimates‐for‐cities‐counties‐and‐the‐state‐2020‐2022/  Oversight Committee costs are wildly overestimated. The Fiscal Impact report states “..staff time easily climbing to the hundreds of hours per year and even over 1000 hours per year if regular meetings or complex topics trigger substantial staff time commitments.” The Oversight Committee is directly modeled on the county 2016 Measure D Transportation Bond. Staff should have included estimates from the county on costs to run that Committee which has almost identical duties including reviewing annual third party audit and publishing an annual report summarizes results. The Empty Home Tax CAN NOT meet more than once a year without City Council approval. Currently staff is estimating costs of $126,374 for one annual publicly noticed meeting. This deserves significant scrutiny as this level of costs of a single public meeting annually is not in alignment with any other similar committees.
 Litigation response budget should not be included is startup estimates. There is no indication that the Empty Home Tax exposes the City to a high level of risk for litigation. Including $100,000 in startup costs is unwarranted and falsely inflates costs.
 Web portal already exists that can be used for the Empty Home Tax. The City already has a web portal built for to receive reports and payments for the Transient Occupancy Tax and Short Term Rental Fees. The budget

41.114
2 includes ~ $65,000 to build a web portal that already exists. Modification can be made to existing system for much less with a realistic range for costs being more like $5000 ‐ $15,000.  Outreach to property owners – Information on the reporting process and due dates can be included with the ad valorem tax bill sent out by the county. The tax was designed to be able to take advantage of this already existing system to connect with property owners to keep costs low. There are already mechanisms in place to reimburse the county for integrating that information on to the tax bill. Current cost estimates are too high.  Total startup costs are unrealistically high and not supported. The City of Oakland (pop. 422,000) Fiscal Impact report prior to the election where their vacancy tax was passed estimated startup costs at $100,0001 . Their tax
has a much higher administrative burden with city staff doing data analysis yearly to determine vacant properties. The self‐declaration process for the City of Santa Cruz (pop. 65, 000) to reduce administrative costs.

At a minimum, estimates of startup costs from Vancouver, British Columbia that has a self‐declaration process should be scaled appropriately to the population in Santa Cruz and included in the report. Estimates from Oakland would also be helpful to include. We estimate one time startup costs of $150,000 ‐ $250,000. 1 https://www.oaklandauditor.com/wp‐content/uploads/2018/10/20180807_Ballot‐Measure‐W‐Special‐Parcel‐Tax‐on‐Vacant‐Properties.pdf We have not and cannot produce enough affordable housing units to meet the demand. Skyrocketing housing costs and stagnate wages are pushing our friends, family and neighbors out. You can take action today to publicly support the Empty Home Tax as a reasonable, fair and effective way to subsidize the creation of affordable housing for the lowest income levels. Doing nothing is not an option and the City Council’s lack of progress in bringing forward policy initiative to address our affordable crisis is being watched closely by voters. Take a positive step today to take action, to publicly support the Empty Home Tax. We count on you to be bold and do what is best for our community. This Community is ready to step up and do our part to keep Santa Cruz accessible and thriving. Will you join us? Regards,
Cyndi
Yes on Empty Home Tax
Cyndi Dawson
Campaign Manager
Fund Affordable Housing
emptyhometax.org
@emptyhometax
831-200-3878
Donate Now

41.115
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Paul Burrowes <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2022 9:26 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Empty Home tax
“Honorable Mayor and City Council:

I would like to express to you my concern with the proposed Empty Home Tax. This initiative is extremely flawed and very intrusive to Santa Cruz residents. This initiative will give local government the authority to enter into our private lives and grant government the opportunity to watch over our personal finances and our comings in and out of our homes.

I urge you to place this initiative on the ballot and let the voters decide on this.

All the best,

PAUL BURROWES
REAL ESTATE CONSULTANT | DRE 01955563
831.295.5130 or 408.497.3989
[email protected] www.Burrowes.com
5522 Scotts Valley Drive, Scotts Valley, CA 95066
CRS | CCEC | SFR

41.116
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Nick Bailey <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2022 9:31 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Empty Home Tax
Honorable Mayor and City Council,
I would like to express to you my concern with the proposed Empty Home Tax. This initiative is extremely flawed and very intrusive to Santa Cruz residents. This initiative will give local government the authority to enter into the private lives of Santa Cruz residents and grant government the opportunity to watch over their personal finances and their comings in and out of their homes.

I urge you to place this initiative on the ballot and let the voters decide on this.

Thank you,
Nick Bailey
Nick Bailey
Broker Associate | Realtor® at Bailey Properties, Inc.

Phone 831.706.7349 Email [email protected]
Address 1602 Ocean St. Santa Cruz, CA 95060
Website www.NickBailey.realestate CA DRE# 02042562

41.117
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2022 9:40 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Empty Home Tax- A Bad Idea
Mayor and City Council:

I am concerned with the proposed Empty Home Tax. This initiative is another government over-reach with little to no upside. A portion of the over-reach is the watching of constituents personal finances, and a mandatory check-in on an annual basis. The recession we are entering will have a financial impact on everyone; I urge you to take no action on this matter.

If you must take action, put the initiative on the ballot and let the voters decide.

Thank you,
John Flaniken
2020 REALTOR® of the Year, Santa Cruz County Assoc.

Founder | Owner
P 831-334-0890 E [email protected]
W www.tradeinrealestate.com

41.118
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Greg Lukina <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2022 9:49 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Empty Home Tax - Please place this initiative on the ballot Honorable Mayor and City Council:

I would like to express to you my concern with the proposed Empty Home Tax. This initiative is extremely flawed and very intrusive to Santa Cruz property owners. This initiative will give local government the authority to enter into our private lives and grant government the opportunity to watch over our personal finances and our comings in and out of our homes. Finding a sustainable funding source for affordable housing is critical for our community; however, this is not the best means. The cost of implementation and oversight of this initiative will erode any fiscal benefit from the tax.

I urge you to place this initiative on the ballot and let the voters decide on this.

Thank you,

Greg Lukina

41.119
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Zennon Ulyate-Crow <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2022 1:02 PM
To: Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; City Council
Cc: Bonnie Bush
Subject: Support the Empty Home Tax Now!
Dear Councilmember
Santa Cruz is in an affordable housing crisis! Our essential workers including teachers, healthcare workers, childcare providers and service workers cannot afford to live in our town. These workers are the engine of Santa Cruz's vibrant culture and economy. I am writing you today to urge you to take action today to publicly support the community‐driven Empty Home Tax Ordinance.

Over 6000 residents of Santa Cruz signed the petition to support putting the Empty Home Tax on the ballot, but we don't have to wait for November. Recent numbers from the California Department of Finance report a 9% vacancy rate in Santa Cruz. Everyone in Santa Cruz has that house or houses in their neighborhood where no one every seems to be home. Property owners across the city have raised their hand and supported the Empty Home Tax because it is fair, balanced and will help ensure their friends, family and kids can stay living here too.

Please help keep Santa Cruz vibrant and support the Empty Home Tax today! Yours sincerely,
Zennon Ulyate‐Crow
___________________________
This email was sent by Zennon Ulyate‐Crow via Do Gooder, a website that allows people to contact you regarding issues they consider important. In accordance with web protocol RFC 3834 we have set the FROM field of this email to our generic no‐reply address at [email protected], however Zennon provided an email address ([email protected]) which we included in the REPLY‐TO field.

Please reply to Zennon Ulyate‐Crow at [email protected].

To learn more about Do Gooder visit www.dogooder.co To learn more about web protocol RFC 3834 visit:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3834

41.120
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Candie Noel <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2022 12:04 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Empty Home Tax
Honorable Mayor and City Council,
I would like to express to you my concern with the proposed Empty Home Tax. This initiative is extremely flawed and very intrusive to Santa Cruz residents. The initiative will give local government the authority to enter into our private lives and grant government the opportunity to watch over our personal finances and our comings in and out of our homes.

I urge you to place this initiative on the ballot and let the voters decide.

Thank you,
Candie Noel
Candie Noel
Bailey Properties
dre# 01339841
831‐252‐2638

41.121
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2022 12:52 PM
To: Bonnie Bush; Tony Condotti; City Council
Subject: MAJOR error in proposed ballot language proposed for Empty Home Tax Importance: High
Hi Bonnie and Tony‐
I wanted to highlight a major error in the proposed ballot language for Empty Home Tax. A property must be occupied for 120 days or more as outlined in the impartial summary (scroll to bottom of the summary)l. The current language proposed is incorrect. Also there is additional components of the proposed language that do not align with the impartial summary prepared. Please see below our red lined version which aligns with the impartial summary and provides the clearest description for voters. We urge the staff to update the language accordingly for consideration by Council.

This is a redline version of the language proposed for the agenda packet for Item 41:

Shall the City of Santa Cruz establish an “Empty Homes Yes Tax” on residences that are in use less than 120 days within a calendar year vacant 120 days or more per year in the amount of $6,000 per single-family residence, $6000 per parcel with six or fewer units, and $3,000 per year on condominiums and apartments with 7 or more units, with revenue allocated to affordable housing projects, reimbursement for administering the tax up to 15% and programs (with up to 5 % of revenue which may be used set aside for homeless sanitation services), with and expenditures administration overseen by a community oversight committee.

Please see Measure W ballot language below as a reference although there are significant differences between the Oakland measure and what is proposed in Santa Cruz.

Shall the Measure, to fund homeless services and resources to address illegal dumping, and discourage vacant properties, by enacting a Vacant Property Tax on parcels used less than 50 days per year, at annual rates of $6,000 per parcel, $3,000 for condominium units, and other specified rates; raising about $10,000,000 annually for 20 years; with community oversight and exemptions for very low income, lowincome seniors and hardship, be adopted?[2] ”
Regards,
Cyndi
Yes on Empty Home Tax
Cyndi Dawson
Campaign Manager
Fund Affordable Housing
emptyhometax.org
@emptyhometax
831-200-3878
Donate Now

41.122
2 .

IMPARTIAL SUMMARY FROM CITY OF SANTA CRUZ
If approved by the voters, this initiative would add Chapter 3.38 to the Santa Cruz Municipal Code, establishing a tax on residential parcels that are in use less than 120 days within a calendar year (“vacant parcels”). This would be a special tax, i.e., the City could use the revenue only for purposes specified in the measure. The tax would apply to various types of vacant properties, including single-family and multi-family residential parcels, condominiums, and townhomes.

The measure would require each owner of a residential parcel to submit an annual declaration to the City regarding the vacancy status of their property. The City would also be required to establish a process to annually audit properties declared “in use” to verify vacancy status. Making a false declaration as to a property’s vacancy status would constitute a misdemeanor. Other violations of proposed Chapter 3.38 would be charged as infractions for the first two violations in a one-year period, and misdemeanors for three or more violations in the same time period.

The following annual tax rates would be established, subject to an annual CPI adjustment:
 $6,000 per vacant single-family residence;
 $6,000 per residential parcel with six or fewer units, where all units are in use less than 120 days per calendar year;
 $3,000 per vacant residential unit of a condominium or townhome; and  $3,000 per vacant residential unit on residential parcels with seven or more units. 
An owner would be permitted to claim an exemption from the tax in a number of enumerated circumstances, including demonstrable hardship, as defined, where the owner has experienced a significant medical event, construction activities are active or pending, where the property is affected by natural disaster, and other circumstances as specified.

The use of tax revenue would be restricted to specified purposes, including financing affordable housing construction, purchasing existing units for the purpose of maintaining or converting them to affordable housing, providing restroom and hygiene services to the homeless, and paying the costs of administering the tax and for independent audits of the use of tax revenues.

An Empty Home Tax Oversight Committee would be established to oversee the administration of the tax and to make recommendations to the City Council for improvement of zoning and land use designations in the interest of creating affordable housing. The Committee would have up to nine members, including three members who must be renters, two low-income individuals, two with financial expertise, one UCSC student, and one

41.123
3 unionized city employee. The measure would require the City Manager or designee to provide clerical assistance, administrative support and technical assistance, and to attend Committee meetings.

This measure would authorize the City to adopt rules and regulations for implementation and administration of the tax. A simple majority of voters is required to pass the measure.

41.124
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Morgan Lukina <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2022 1:59 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Empty Home Tax
Honorable Mayor and City Council,
I would like to express to you my concern with the proposed Empty Home Tax. This initiative is very intrusive to Santa Cruz residents. This initiative will give the local government the authority to enter into our private lives and to watch over our personal finances and our comings in and out of our homes. This will not solve the home affordability problem in our community, it will just make homeowners upset.

I urge you to place this initiative on the ballot and let the voters decide on this.

Sincerley,
Morgan Lukina
--
MORGAN LYNG LUKINA
CEO | MANAGING BROKER | DRE 01873190
Mobile: +1 831 600 5199
Email [email protected]
Address: 1041 41st Ave, Santa Cruz, CA 95062

41.125
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Ace Estess <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2022 2:11 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Empty House Tax - Please send to the ballott!
Honorable Mayor and City Council:

As a local real estate professional, I would like to express to you my concern with the proposed Empty Home Tax. I believe this initiative is extremely flawed and very intrusive to Santa Cruz residents, and does not address the ultimate issue of housing availability and prices. There are better solutions. This initiative will give local government the authority to enter into our private lives and grant government the opportunity to watch over our personal finances and our comings in and out of our homes, among many other issues, including holding up real estate transactions. I strongly believe it will not solve issues more than it creates new ones and it feels like a massive governmental overreach that has not been well thought-out.

I strongly urge you to place this initiative on the ballot and let the voters decide on this.

Thank you,
Ace Estess
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE and DISCLAIMER: This email message is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. Nothing in this communication should be interpreted as a digital or electronic signature that can be used to authenticate a contract or other legal document. The recipients are advised that the sender and Dream Catch Properties is not qualified to provide, and have not been contracted to provide, legal, financial, or tax advice, and that any such advice regarding any investment by the recipients must be obtained from the recipients’ attorney, accountant, or tax professional.

41.126
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Carolyn Green <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2022 2:15 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Please put Empty Home Tax on the ballot
Honorable Mayor and City Council,
This tax seems very expensive and intrusive to the owners of property here. Please look into other ways to improve housing availability.

Putting it on the ballot at least will let you know what the majority of your citizens think!

Thank you,
C. L. Green

41.127
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2022 2:49 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Empty Home Tax
“Honorable Mayor and City Council:

I urge you to place this initiative on the ballot and let the voters decide on this.

Thank you,
Book an appointment with me:
https://calendly.com/renee‐75/consulting‐appointments

41.128
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Lynn - <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2022 2:50 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Thank you for studying the fiscal impact of the EHT Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers,
Thanks to you and City staff for studying the Empty Homes Tax fiscal impact.

This will cost the City over $1 million for the first year alone! Long before any tax revenue appears. This process of monitoring homeowners and auditing them every year is expensive, not to mention an invasion of privacy.

Santa Cruz Together opposes the Empty Homes Tax because it is an invasive homeowner registry:
 Every homeowner will have to comply with new, onerous laws, every year.  Normal homeowners will face criminal penalties.
 3.38.100 A states “Each person or entity in violation of this Chapter may be charged with a separate offense for each and every day”. A homeowner can be charged with a crime for every day their paperwork is missing.
 Every homeowner can be audited up to once a year.
 3.38.030 A. establishes random audits of homeowners up to once a year. The audit process is poorly defined but requires up to three years of records. The law says “A registered owner may be required to provide information at any time and for a period of up to three years respecting the identity of the registered owner, the status of the property and the nature of the occupancy of the property. If audited the owner shall be required to submit documentation and evidence”.

The high cost of this new bureaucracy is unwanted.

Thank you,
Lynn

41.129
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Neal Langholz <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2022 3:09 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Empty Impact of Tax Homes
Mayor Brunner and City Councilmembers,
Thank you for the eye-opening fiscal impact study of the Empty Homes Tax.

This shows that this badly written Citizen Initiative is not only deeply flawed and invasive, but also expensive.

Monitoring how much everyone in the City is or isn't home every year is not a City Service that we want, or need.

Thank you,
Neal Langholz
--
Neal Langholz
Broker Associate | Karon Properties
1103 Mission St | Santa Cruz, CA 95060
Phone: 831.818.4822
DRE# 00933904
www.karonproperties.com

41.130
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Jean Marie Ragus <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2022 3:29 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Proposed Empty Home Tax
“Honorable Mayor and City Council:

I would like to express to you my concern with the proposed Empty Home Tax. This initiative is extremely flawed and very intrusive to Santa Cruz residents. This initiative will give local government the authority to enter into our private lives and grant the government the opportunity to watch over our personal finances and our comings in and out of our homes.

I urge you to place this initiative on the ballot and let the voters decide on this.

Thank you,
Jean Marie Ragus
Jean Marie Ragus
David Lyng Real Estate
CalBRE# 00970974
5522 Scotts Valley Drive
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
(831) 566-2021

41.131
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Valerie Mishkin <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2022 3:34 PM
To: City Council; Martine Watkins; Sonja Brunner; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers
Subject: Re: Empty House Tax
On Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 3:32 PM Valerie Mishkin <[email protected]> wrote:
“Honorable Mayor and City Council:

I am expressing my concerns over the proposed Empty Home Tax. This initiative will give local government the authority to enter into our private lives and grant the government the opportunity to watch over our personal finances and our comings in and out of our homes. This feels autocratic in authority, and intrusive of rights to own, protect, and enjoy privacy.

The amount of income it could provide would likely barely support the staff to administer it and do little to nothing to increase homeless housing. I propose for your future consideration, an incentive for those who occupy less, or for any and all, to build ADUs to help with our housing needs. Make it encouraging though the cost and speed to get them done. Another thought is to raise support for voluntary funding housing, possibly with incentives.

I urge you to place this initiative on the ballot and let the voters decide on this. --

Valerie Mishkin
Bailey Properties
DRE# 02092111
[email protected]
Office 831 426 4100
Cell 831 238 0504
1602 Ocean Street Santa Cruz CA. 95060
Local Government Relations Committee
Smart Coast California Board of Directors
Santa Cruz City Master Recyclers
--

41.132
2 Valerie Mishkin
Bailey Properties
DRE# 02092111
[email protected]
Office 831 426 4100
Cell 831 238 0504
1602 Ocean Street Santa Cruz CA. 95060
Local Government Relations Committee
Smart Coast California Board of Directors
Santa Cruz City Master Recyclers

41.133
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bryn Brentnall <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2022 3:55 PM
To: Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; City Council
Cc: Bonnie Bush
Subject: Support the Empty Home Tax Now!
Dear Councilmember
Santa Cruz is in an affordable housing crisis! Our essential workers including teachers, healthcare workers, childcare providers and service workers cannot afford to live in our town. These workers are the engine of Santa Cruz's vibrant culture and economy. I am writing you today to urge you to take action today to publicly support the community‐driven Empty Home Tax Ordinance.

Over 6000 residents of Santa Cruz signed the petition to support putting the Empty Home Tax on the ballot, but we don't have to wait for November. Recent numbers from the California Department of Finance report a 9% vacancy rate in Santa Cruz. Everyone in Santa Cruz has that house or houses in their neighborhood where no one every seems to be home. Property owners across the city have raised their hand and supported the Empty Home Tax because it is fair, balanced and will help ensure their friends, family and kids can stay living here too.

We want our neighbors to be at home. We want community and unity. We want Santa Cruz to be accessible.

We want economic diversity which drives racial and cultural diversity which is beneficial to our economy and overall awareness. These are the things that make Santa Cruz special. Please help keep Santa Cruz vibrant and support the Empty Home Tax today!
Yours sincerely,
Bryn Brentnall
___________________________
This email was sent by Bryn Brentnall via Do Gooder, a website that allows people to contact you regarding issues they consider important. In accordance with web protocol RFC 3834 we have set the FROM field of this email to our generic no‐reply address at [email protected], however Bryn provided an email address ([email protected]) which we included in the REPLY‐TO field.

Please reply to Bryn Brentnall at [email protected].

To learn more about Do Gooder visit www.dogooder.co To learn more about web protocol RFC 3834 visit:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3834

41.134
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Clay Roades <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2022 3:57 PM
To: Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; City Council
Cc: Bonnie Bush
Subject: Support the Empty Home Tax Now!
Dear Councilmember
Santa Cruz is in an affordable housing crisis! Our essential workers including teachers, healthcare workers, childcare providers and service workers cannot afford to live in our town. These workers are the engine of Santa Cruz's vibrant culture and economy. I am writing you today to urge you to take action today to publicly support the community‐driven Empty Home Tax Ordinance.

Over 6000 residents of Santa Cruz signed the petition to support putting the Empty Home Tax on the ballot, but we don't have to wait for November. Recent numbers from the California Department of Finance report a 9% vacancy rate in Santa Cruz. Everyone in Santa Cruz has that house or houses in their neighborhood where no one every seems to be home. Property owners across the city have raised their hand and supported the Empty Home Tax because it is fair, balanced and will help ensure their friends, family and kids can stay living here too.

Please help keep Santa Cruz vibrant and support the Empty Home Tax today! Yours sincerely,
Clay Roades
___________________________
This email was sent by Clay Roades via Do Gooder, a website that allows people to contact you regarding issues they consider important. In accordance with web protocol RFC 3834 we have set the FROM field of this email to our generic no‐reply address at [email protected], however Clay provided an email address ([email protected]) which we included in the REPLY‐TO field.

Please reply to Clay Roades at [email protected].

To learn more about Do Gooder visit www.dogooder.co To learn more about web protocol RFC 3834 visit:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3834

41.135
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Samantha Unger <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2022 3:57 PM
To: Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; City Council
Cc: Bonnie Bush
Subject: Support the Empty Home Tax Now!
Dear Councilmember
Santa Cruz is in an affordable housing crisis! Our essential workers including teachers, healthcare workers, childcare providers and service workers cannot afford to live in our town. These workers are the engine of Santa Cruz's vibrant culture and economy. I am writing you today to urge you to take action today to publicly support the community‐driven Empty Home Tax Ordinance.

Over 6000 residents of Santa Cruz signed the petition to support putting the Empty Home Tax on the ballot, but we don't have to wait for November. Recent numbers from the California Department of Finance report a 9% vacancy rate in Santa Cruz. Everyone in Santa Cruz has that house or houses in their neighborhood where no one every seems to be home. Property owners across the city have raised their hand and supported the Empty Home Tax because it is fair, balanced and will help ensure their friends, family and kids can stay living here too.

Please help keep Santa Cruz vibrant and support the Empty Home Tax today! ___________________________
This email was sent by Samantha Unger via Do Gooder, a website that allows people to contact you regarding issues they consider important. In accordance with web protocol RFC 3834 we have set the FROM field of this email to our generic no‐reply address at [email protected], however Samantha provided an email address ([email protected]) which we included in the REPLY‐TO field.

Please reply to Samantha Unger at [email protected].

To learn more about Do Gooder visit www.dogooder.co To learn more about web protocol RFC 3834 visit:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3834

41.136
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Dylan Nebeker <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2022 3:58 PM
To: Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; City Council
Cc: Bonnie Bush
Subject: Support the Empty Home Tax Now!
Dear Councilmember
Santa Cruz is in an affordable housing crisis! Our essential workers including teachers, healthcare workers, childcare providers and service workers cannot afford to live in our town. These workers are the engine of Santa Cruz's vibrant culture and economy. I am writing you today to urge you to take action today to publicly support the community‐driven Empty Home Tax Ordinance.

Over 6000 residents of Santa Cruz signed the petition to support putting the Empty Home Tax on the ballot, but we don't have to wait for November. Recent numbers from the California Department of Finance report a 9% vacancy rate in Santa Cruz. Everyone in Santa Cruz has that house or houses in their neighborhood where no one every seems to be home. Property owners across the city have raised their hand and supported the Empty Home Tax because it is fair, balanced and will help ensure their friends, family and kids can stay living here too.

Please help keep Santa Cruz vibrant and support the Empty Home Tax today! Yours sincerely,
Dylan Nebeker
___________________________
This email was sent by Dylan Nebeker via Do Gooder, a website that allows people to contact you regarding issues they consider important. In accordance with web protocol RFC 3834 we have set the FROM field of this email to our generic no‐reply address at [email protected], however Dylan provided an email address ([email protected]) which we included in the REPLY‐TO field.

Please reply to Dylan Nebeker at [email protected].

To learn more about Do Gooder visit www.dogooder.co To learn more about web protocol RFC 3834 visit:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3834

41.137
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: alex north <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2022 4:00 PM
To: Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; City Council
Cc: Bonnie Bush
Subject: Support the Empty Home Tax Now!
Dear Councilmember
Santa Cruz is in an affordable housing crisis! Our essential workers including teachers, healthcare workers, childcare providers and service workers cannot afford to live in our town. These workers are the engine of Santa Cruz's vibrant culture and economy. I am writing you today to urge you to take action today to publicly support the community‐driven Empty Home Tax Ordinance.

Over 6000 residents of Santa Cruz signed the petition to support putting the Empty Home Tax on the ballot, but we don't have to wait for November. Recent numbers from the California Department of Finance report a 9% vacancy rate in Santa Cruz. Everyone in Santa Cruz has that house or houses in their neighborhood where no one every seems to be home. Property owners across the city have raised their hand and supported the Empty Home Tax because it is fair, balanced and will help ensure their friends, family and kids can stay living here too.

Please help keep Santa Cruz vibrant and support the Empty Home Tax today! ___________________________
This email was sent by alex north via Do Gooder, a website that allows people to contact you regarding issues they consider important. In accordance with web protocol RFC 3834 we have set the FROM field of this email to our generic no‐reply address at [email protected], however alex provided an email address ([email protected]) which we included in the REPLY‐TO field.

Please reply to alex north at [email protected].

To learn more about Do Gooder visit www.dogooder.co To learn more about web protocol RFC 3834 visit:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3834

41.138
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Manav Patel <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2022 4:00 PM
To: Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; City Council
Cc: Bonnie Bush
Subject: Support the Empty Home Tax Now!
Dear Councilmember
Santa Cruz is in an affordable housing crisis! Our essential workers including teachers, healthcare workers, childcare providers, and service workers cannot afford to live in our town. These workers are the engine of Santa Cruz's vibrant culture and economy. I am writing you today to urge you to take action today to publicly support the community‐driven Empty Home Tax Ordinance.

Over 6000 residents of Santa Cruz signed the petition to support putting the Empty Home Tax on the ballot, but we don't have to wait for November. Recent numbers from the California Department of Finance report a 9% vacancy rate in Santa Cruz. Everyone in Santa Cruz has that house or houses in their neighborhood where no one ever seems to be home. Property owners across the city have raised their hand and supported the Empty Home Tax because it is fair, balanced, and will help ensure their friends, family, and kids can stay living here too.

We have many property owners supporting this measure as a way for them to step up and do their part to keep Santa Cruz accessible. The burden on property owners is extremely low. They fill out a declaration online annually and for the average property owner, it will take 5 mins. ADUs aren't taxed. There just needs to be someone on a property for 120 non‐consecutive days a year and the owner doesn't pay the tax. This is fair and reasonable and gets broad support across the community.

Please help keep Santa Cruz vibrant and support the Empty Home Tax today! You have the power to make positive change for a HUGE number of people in Santa Cruz if they are bold and act now.

Yours sincerely,
Manav Patel
___________________________
This email was sent by Manav Patel via Do Gooder, a website that allows people to contact you regarding issues they consider important. In accordance with web protocol RFC 3834 we have set the FROM field of this email to our generic no‐reply address at [email protected], however Manav provided an email address ([email protected]) which we included in the REPLY‐TO field.

Please reply to Manav Patel at [email protected].

41.139
2 To learn more about Do Gooder visit www.dogooder.co To learn more about web protocol RFC 3834 visit:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3834

41.140
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: oliver minor <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2022 4:11 PM
To: Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; City Council
Cc: Bonnie Bush
Subject: Support the Empty Home Tax Now!
Dear Councilmember
Santa Cruz is in an affordable housing crisis! Our essential workers including teachers, healthcare workers, childcare providers and service workers cannot afford to live in our town. These workers are the engine of Santa Cruz's vibrant culture and economy. I am writing you today to urge you to take action today to publicly support the community‐driven Empty Home Tax Ordinance.

Over 6000 residents of Santa Cruz signed the petition to support putting the Empty Home Tax on the ballot, but we don't have to wait for November. Recent numbers from the California Department of Finance report a 9% vacancy rate in Santa Cruz. Everyone in Santa Cruz has that house or houses in their neighborhood where no one every seems to be home. Property owners across the city have raised their hand and supported the Empty Home Tax because it is fair, balanced and will help ensure their friends, family and kids can stay living here too.

Please help keep Santa Cruz vibrant and support the Empty Home Tax today! Yours sincerely,
oliver minor
___________________________
This email was sent by oliver minor via Do Gooder, a website that allows people to contact you regarding issues they consider important. In accordance with web protocol RFC 3834 we have set the FROM field of this email to our generic no‐reply address at [email protected], however oliver provided an email address ([email protected]) which we included in the REPLY‐TO field.

Please reply to oliver minor at [email protected].

To learn more about Do Gooder visit www.dogooder.co To learn more about web protocol RFC 3834 visit:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3834

41.141
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Caia Lomeli <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2022 4:13 PM
To: Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; City Council
Cc: Bonnie Bush
Subject: Support the Empty Home Tax Now!
Dear Councilmember
Santa Cruz is in an affordable housing crisis! Our essential workers including teachers, healthcare workers, childcare providers and service workers cannot afford to live in our town. These workers are the engine of Santa Cruz's vibrant culture and economy. I am writing you today to urge you to take action today to publicly support the community‐driven Empty Home Tax Ordinance.

Over 6000 residents of Santa Cruz signed the petition to support putting the Empty Home Tax on the ballot, but we don't have to wait for November. Recent numbers from the California Department of Finance report a 9% vacancy rate in Santa Cruz. Everyone in Santa Cruz has that house or houses in their neighborhood where no one every seems to be home. Property owners across the city have raised their hand and supported the Empty Home Tax because it is fair, balanced and will help ensure their friends, family and kids can stay living here too.

Please help keep Santa Cruz vibrant and support the Empty Home Tax today! Yours sincerely,
Caia Lomeli
___________________________
This email was sent by Caia Lomeli via Do Gooder, a website that allows people to contact you regarding issues they consider important. In accordance with web protocol RFC 3834 we have set the FROM field of this email to our generic no‐reply address at [email protected], however Caia provided an email address ([email protected]) which we included in the REPLY‐TO field.

Please reply to Caia Lomeli at [email protected].

To learn more about Do Gooder visit www.dogooder.co To learn more about web protocol RFC 3834 visit:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3834

41.142
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Raj Sajjan <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2022 4:32 PM
To: Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; City Council
Cc: Bonnie Bush
Subject: Support the Empty Home Tax Now!
Dear Councilmember
Santa Cruz is in an affordable housing crisis! Our essential workers including teachers, healthcare workers, childcare providers and service workers cannot afford to live in our town. These workers are the engine of Santa Cruz's vibrant culture and economy. I am writing you today to urge you to take action today to publicly support the community‐driven Empty Home Tax Ordinance.

Over 6000 residents of Santa Cruz signed the petition to support putting the Empty Home Tax on the ballot, but we don't have to wait for November. Recent numbers from the California Department of Finance report a 9% vacancy rate in Santa Cruz. Everyone in Santa Cruz has that house or houses in their neighborhood where no one every seems to be home. Property owners across the city have raised their hand and supported the Empty Home Tax because it is fair, balanced and will help ensure their friends, family and kids can stay living here too.

Please help keep Santa Cruz vibrant and support the Empty Home Tax today! Yours sincerely,
Raj Sajjan
___________________________
This email was sent by Raj Sajjan via Do Gooder, a website that allows people to contact you regarding issues they consider important. In accordance with web protocol RFC 3834 we have set the FROM field of this email to our generic no‐reply address at [email protected], however Raj provided an email address ([email protected]) which we included in the REPLY‐TO field.

Please reply to Raj Sajjan at [email protected].

To learn more about Do Gooder visit www.dogooder.co To learn more about web protocol RFC 3834 visit:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3834

41.143
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Zane Sanchez <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2022 4:33 PM
To: Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; City Council
Cc: Bonnie Bush
Subject: Support the Empty Home Tax Now!
Dear Councilmember
Santa Cruz is in an affordable housing crisis! Our essential workers including teachers, healthcare workers, childcare providers and service workers cannot afford to live in our town. These workers are the engine of Santa Cruz's vibrant culture and economy. I am writing you today to urge you to take action today to publicly support the community‐driven Empty Home Tax Ordinance.

Over 6000 residents of Santa Cruz signed the petition to support putting the Empty Home Tax on the ballot, but we don't have to wait for November. Recent numbers from the California Department of Finance report a 9% vacancy rate in Santa Cruz. Everyone in Santa Cruz has that house or houses in their neighborhood where no one every seems to be home. Property owners across the city have raised their hand and supported the Empty Home Tax because it is fair, balanced and will help ensure their friends, family and kids can stay living here too.

Please help keep Santa Cruz vibrant and support the Empty Home Tax today! Yours sincerely,
Zane Sanchez
___________________________
This email was sent by Zane Sanchez via Do Gooder, a website that allows people to contact you regarding issues they consider important. In accordance with web protocol RFC 3834 we have set the FROM field of this email to our generic no‐reply address at [email protected], however Zane provided an email address ([email protected]) which we included in the REPLY‐TO field.

Please reply to Zane Sanchez at [email protected].

To learn more about Do Gooder visit www.dogooder.co To learn more about web protocol RFC 3834 visit:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3834

41.144
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Lauren Casterson <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2022 4:36 PM
To: Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; City Council
Cc: Bonnie Bush
Subject: Support the Empty Home Tax Now!
Dear Councilmember
Santa Cruz is in an affordable housing crisis! Our essential workers including teachers, healthcare workers, childcare providers and service workers cannot afford to live in our town. These workers are the engine of Santa Cruz's vibrant culture and economy. I am writing you today to urge you to take action today to publicly support the community‐driven Empty Home Tax Ordinance.

Over 6000 residents of Santa Cruz signed the petition to support putting the Empty Home Tax on the ballot, but we don't have to wait for November. Recent numbers from the California Department of Finance report a 9% vacancy rate in Santa Cruz. Everyone in Santa Cruz has that house or houses in their neighborhood where no one every seems to be home. Property owners across the city have raised their hand and supported the Empty Home Tax because it is fair, balanced and will help ensure their friends, family and kids can stay living here too.

Please help keep Santa Cruz vibrant and support the Empty Home Tax today! Yours sincerely,
Lauren Casterson
___________________________
This email was sent by Lauren Casterson via Do Gooder, a website that allows people to contact you regarding issues they consider important. In accordance with web protocol RFC 3834 we have set the FROM field of this email to our generic no‐reply address at [email protected], however Lauren provided an email address ([email protected]) which we included in the REPLY‐TO field.

Please reply to Lauren Casterson at [email protected].

To learn more about Do Gooder visit www.dogooder.co To learn more about web protocol RFC 3834 visit:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3834

41.145
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Sabrina Lamance <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2022 4:38 PM
To: Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; City Council
Cc: Bonnie Bush
Subject: Support the Empty Home Tax Now!
Dear Councilmember
Santa Cruz is in an affordable housing crisis! Our essential workers including teachers, healthcare workers, childcare providers and service workers cannot afford to live in our town. These workers are the engine of Santa Cruz's vibrant culture and economy. I am writing you today to urge you to take action today to publicly support the community‐driven Empty Home Tax Ordinance.

Over 6000 residents of Santa Cruz signed the petition to support putting the Empty Home Tax on the ballot, but we don't have to wait for November. Recent numbers from the California Department of Finance report a 9% vacancy rate in Santa Cruz. Everyone in Santa Cruz has that house or houses in their neighborhood where no one every seems to be home. Property owners across the city have raised their hand and supported the Empty Home Tax because it is fair, balanced and will help ensure their friends, family and kids can stay living here too.

Please help keep Santa Cruz vibrant and support the Empty Home Tax today! Yours sincerely,
Sabrina Lamance
___________________________
This email was sent by Sabrina Lamance via Do Gooder, a website that allows people to contact you regarding issues they consider important. In accordance with web protocol RFC 3834 we have set the FROM field of this email to our generic no‐reply address at [email protected], however Sabrina provided an email address ([email protected]) which we included in the REPLY‐TO field.

Please reply to Sabrina Lamance at [email protected].

To learn more about Do Gooder visit www.dogooder.co To learn more about web protocol RFC 3834 visit:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3834

41.146
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Valerie Mishkin <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2022 4:41 PM
To: City Council; Martine Watkins; Sonja Brunner; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers
Subject: Re: Empty House Tax
Last Thought, Don't take it to the public let it go! Find another way to fund needed housing not through violating privacy and use rights.

On Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 3:33 PM Valerie Mishkin <[email protected]> wrote:

On Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 3:32 PM Valerie Mishkin <[email protected]> wrote:
“Honorable Mayor and City Council:

I urge you to place this initiative on the ballot and let the voters decide on this. --

41.147
2 --

41.148
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Lanie Overton <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2022 4:43 PM
To: Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; City Council
Cc: Bonnie Bush
Subject: Support the Empty Home Tax Now!
Dear Councilmember
Santa Cruz is in an affordable housing crisis! Our essential workers including teachers, healthcare workers, childcare providers and service workers cannot afford to live in our town. These workers are the engine of Santa Cruz's vibrant culture and economy. I am writing you today to urge you to take action today to publicly support the community‐driven Empty Home Tax Ordinance.

Over 6000 residents of Santa Cruz signed the petition to support putting the Empty Home Tax on the ballot, but we don't have to wait for November. Recent numbers from the California Department of Finance report a 9% vacancy rate in Santa Cruz. Everyone in Santa Cruz has that house or houses in their neighborhood where no one every seems to be home. Property owners across the city have raised their hand and supported the Empty Home Tax because it is fair, balanced and will help ensure their friends, family and kids can stay living here too.

Please help keep Santa Cruz vibrant and support the Empty Home Tax today! Yours sincerely,
Lanie Overton
___________________________
This email was sent by Lanie Overton via Do Gooder, a website that allows people to contact you regarding issues they consider important. In accordance with web protocol RFC 3834 we have set the FROM field of this email to our generic no‐reply address at [email protected], however Lanie provided an email address ([email protected]) which we included in the REPLY‐TO field.

Please reply to Lanie Overton at [email protected].

To learn more about Do Gooder visit www.dogooder.co To learn more about web protocol RFC 3834 visit:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3834

41.149
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Stacey Garcia <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2022 4:52 PM
To: Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; City Council
Cc: Bonnie Bush
Subject: Support the Empty Home Tax Now!
Dear Councilmember
Santa Cruz is in an affordable housing crisis! Our essential workers including teachers, healthcare workers, childcare providers and service workers cannot afford to live in our town. These workers are the engine of Santa Cruz's vibrant culture and economy. I am writing you today to urge you to take action today to publicly support the community‐driven Empty Home Tax Ordinance.

Over 6000 residents of Santa Cruz signed the petition to support putting the Empty Home Tax on the ballot, but we don't have to wait for November. Recent numbers from the California Department of Finance report a 9% vacancy rate in Santa Cruz. Everyone in Santa Cruz has that house or houses in their neighborhood where no one every seems to be home. Property owners across the city have raised their hand and supported the Empty Home Tax because it is fair, balanced and will help ensure their friends, family and kids can stay living here too.

Please help keep Santa Cruz vibrant and support the Empty Home Tax today! Yours sincerely,
Stacey Garcia
___________________________
This email was sent by Stacey Garcia via Do Gooder, a website that allows people to contact you regarding issues they consider important. In accordance with web protocol RFC 3834 we have set the FROM field of this email to our generic no‐reply address at [email protected], however Stacey provided an email address ([email protected]) which we included in the REPLY‐TO field.

Please reply to Stacey Garcia at [email protected].

To learn more about Do Gooder visit www.dogooder.co To learn more about web protocol RFC 3834 visit:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3834

41.150
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Leah Kaplan <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2022 4:58 PM
To: Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; City Council
Cc: Bonnie Bush
Subject: Support the Empty Home Tax Now!
Dear Councilmember
Santa Cruz is in an affordable housing crisis! Our essential workers including teachers, healthcare workers, childcare providers and service workers cannot afford to live in our town. These workers are the engine of Santa Cruz's vibrant culture and economy. I am writing you today to urge you to take action today to publicly support the community‐driven Empty Home Tax Ordinance.

Over 6000 residents of Santa Cruz signed the petition to support putting the Empty Home Tax on the ballot, but we don't have to wait for November. Recent numbers from the California Department of Finance report a 9% vacancy rate in Santa Cruz. Everyone in Santa Cruz has that house or houses in their neighborhood where no one every seems to be home. Property owners across the city have raised their hand and supported the Empty Home Tax because it is fair, balanced and will help ensure their friends, family and kids can stay living here too.

Please help keep Santa Cruz vibrant and support the Empty Home Tax today! ___________________________
This email was sent by Leah Kaplan via Do Gooder, a website that allows people to contact you regarding issues they consider important. In accordance with web protocol RFC 3834 we have set the FROM field of this email to our generic no‐reply address at [email protected], however Leah provided an email address ([email protected]) which we included in the REPLY‐TO field.

Please reply to Leah Kaplan at [email protected].

To learn more about Do Gooder visit www.dogooder.co To learn more about web protocol RFC 3834 visit:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3834

41.151
City Council

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 06/16/2022
AGENDA OF: 06/28/2022
DEPARTMENT: Parks and Recreation
SUBJECT: Pogonip Open Space - Pogonip Master Plan Amendment Process for Homeless Garden Project’s Farm and Garden in Upper Main Meadow and Contamination and Clean-up Feasibility Update in Lower Main Meadow (PR)
RECOMMENDATION: Receive an update and provide directions on 1) the planning process to relocate the Homeless Garden Project’s Farm and Garden to the Upper Main Meadow, Pogonip Open Space; and 2) the feasibility analysis for cleaning-up the contamination to allow for farming to occur in the Lower Main Meadow, Pogonip Open Space.

BACKGROUND: This report is an update to the City Council on the status of the Pogonip Master Plan (1998) amendment process to relocate the Homeless Garden Project’s (HGP) Farm and Garden to the Upper Main Meadow, Pogonip Open Space. It also presents a feasibility analysis of the cost and timeline to remediate the contamination to allow for farming to occur in the Lower Main Meadow, Pogonip Open Space.

The City and HGP have been working together to locate their farm in the Lower Main Meadow for numerous years. The project was included in the 1998 Pogonip Master Plan and Environmental Impact Report which guide development and use of the property. HGP plans to offer workforce training, transitional employment, and support services for homeless persons at the new farm.

The City and HGP approved a lease agreement in May 2017 for the farm project in the Lower Main Meadow, Pogonip Open Space, and the planning permit for the farm building complex was approved in September 2018. The future Pogonip Farm was designed to include a building complex and nine acres of cultivated land. The Pogonip Farm and Garden was planned to triple HGP’s job training capacity from what is provided at its current location on Shaffer Road.

HGP was moving forward with the approved farm when a historic skeet shooting use was discovered at the site. The City directed HGP to put the project on hold until the property could be assessed for contamination and deemed safe for the intended use. The City enrolled in the County of Santa Cruz Environmental Health Division’s Voluntary Site Clean-up Program for project oversight. Numerous rounds of soils investigations found lead and other contaminants over portions of the site at unsafe levels for the intended farming use - posing significant cost, feasibility, and health concerns for the Pogonip Farm and Garden project.

42.1 On July 16, 2021, in response to the challenges at the Lower Main Meadow site, HGP requested that the City undertake a process to relocate the intended site of the farm to the Upper Main Meadow (near the Historic Pogonip Clubhouse). The HGP’s request to relocate to the Upper Main Meadow was reviewed at the August 24, 2021 City Council Meeting, September 13, 2021 Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting, and September 28, 2021 City Council Meeting. On September 28, 2021, the City Council unanimously approved a motion to approve the following actions:
• Confirm the process and timeline for an amendment to the Pogonip Master Plan to relocate the Homeless Garden Project farm to the Upper Main Meadow, Pogonip Open Space.
• Adopt Resolution No. NS-29,876 amending the FY 2022 budget and authorizing an additional appropriation to the Parks and Recreation Department for consulting services related to plan amendments and California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) analysis. • Direct staff to prepare an evaluation of the process for remediating contamination in the lower meadow to residential/agricultural standards, including an estimate of costs and timeline, and to circulate an update to the City Council for consideration in the process, as soon as possible.

In response to discussions at the meeting, HGP wrote a letter to Parks and Recreation indicating that they would need nine acres to farm if the Lower Main Meadow was determined to be the suitable alternative (Attachment "October 21, 2021 Letter from Homeless Garden Project").

During the September 28, 2021 City Council Meeting, staff described that the first phase of the Pogonip Master Plan Amendment would be a due diligence period to look into some of the concerns raised by community members and to allow City departments to review the proposal.

One of the concerns regarded whether or not the project would violate the original grant funding agreement used to purchase the property. The land was purchased with grant funding through the 1988 Wildlife, Coastal and Park Land Conservation Bond Act, or CALPAW Initiative, which was adopted by California voters. Many community members submitted concerned inquiries as to whether or not a farm was in keeping with the CALPAW Initiative requirements.

Parks and Recreation Department and City Attorney Office staff researched the background of the CALPAW Initiative and agreement. On December 78, 2021, the City submitted a formal request to the State to review the proposed land-use. (Attachment "Letter to California Department of Parks and Recreation"). On February 2, 2022, the State provided a formal response that the farming and gardening use is consistent with the CALPAW Initiative (Attachment "Letter from California Department of Parks and Recreation").

HGP’s proposed Pogonip Master Plan amendments were routed internally for preliminary review. As described in the September 28, 2021 City Council staff report, Parks and Recreation Department staff anticipated that there will be significant costs associated with relocating the farm to the Upper Main Meadow. Parks and Recreation Department staff requested that other departments provide input and comments on bigger picture issues or requirements with implications for project cost and feasibility (Attachment "Preliminary Development Review Comments"). The comments were provided to HGP in January 2022.

42.2 On February 9, 2022, HGP sent an email to City Councilmembers requesting that the City refocus efforts on remediating the Lower Main Meadow for farming (Attachment "February 9, 2022 Email from Homeless Garden Project"). In response, City staff did not move forward with biotic and planning consulting services which were scheduled. A notice was sent out to the public that the project had been put on hold and no outreach meetings were scheduled.

On February 17, 2022, the City’s environmental consultant RMD Environmental Solutions (RMD) provided the most recent soils investigation report to the County (Attachment "Revised Additional Soils Report"). On March 25, 2022, the County provided a comment letter describing additional tasks which need to be completed as part of the contamination characterization (Attachment "March 25, 2022 Letter from County of Santa Cruz Environmental Health Division").

On March 31, 2022, Parks and Recreation staff applied to the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) Equitable Community Revitalization Grant for funds to complete the final stages of the environmental investigation of the site, develop a remedial action plan and site management plan, design development plans to clean-up the site, perform environmental review on the project, and receive permitting. On June 7, 2022, DTSC informed P&R staff that the City received the award.

In June 2022, RMD provided a feasibility evaluation of the costs to clean-up the remediation (Attachment "Clean-up Feasibility Evaluation"). As part of the process, RMD and City staff met with HGP to refine the approach based on the intended use, and then met with County staff to confer the approach was in keeping with the regulatory requirements. City staff also had meetings with permitting staff from the Army Corps of Engineers, Regional Water Quality Control Board, and California Department of Fish and Wildlife to try to identify and anticipate challenges or permitting requirements that may come into effect due to the wetland, riparian, and other sensitive natural resources onsite.

Background and information regarding the Pogonip Master Plan (1998) and associated Environmental Impact Report, soils contamination investigation efforts, the Homeless Garden Project’s request for the relocation process, City Council Meeting Staff Reports, and other relevant information can be found at the project’s webpage:
https://www.cityofsantacruz.com/Home/Components/BusinessDirectory/BusinessDirectory/222/ 4350.

DISCUSSION: This discussion will focus on the Pogonip Master Plan (1998) amendment process to relocate HGP to the Upper Main Meadow and the current status of the contamination assessment and planning for the Lower Main Meadow.

Pogonip Master Plan (1998) Amendment Process for Farming in the Upper Main Meadow:

In response to HGP’s initial request to relocate the Farm and Garden to the Upper Main Meadow, on September 28, 2021, the City Council provided direction to City staff to undertake a planning process to amend the master plan which could allow for farming in the Upper Main Meadow and allocated $102,500 to fund the project. As part of the process, the City hired Weber, Hayes and Associates to conduct soils testing in the Upper Main Meadow, paid fees for the County to review the soils report, and purchased signs to post at the trail entrances to inform the public about the project. In February 2022, HGP sent a letter to City Councilmembers to refocus efforts back to the Lower Main Meadow (Attachment "February 9, 2022 Email from

42.3 Homeless Garden Project"). Thereafter, biotic and planning consultants were informed that the project was put on hold. The public was notified that the planning process was not moving forward at that point in time. No additional work has been performed. The project fund has an $85,000 remaining balance. Due to trace elements of a pesticide being found in the initial soil samples, Weber, Hayes and Associates conducted water sampling and will be submitting a report to the County. The remaining funds which have been allocated to the Upper Main Meadow planning process will be returned to the General Fund if no additional work is necessary and the County’s case is closed.

Contamination Assessment and Planning for the Lower Main Meadow:

Status of Soils Characterization
The County reviewed the most recent Revised Additional Soils Report (February 2022) characterizing the contamination and provided additional comments. The County is requiring some additional sampling points to further characterize the horizontal extent of contamination.

Additionally, the risk assessment for the ravine area will be updated to show an unrestricted (residential) land-use scenario as the environmental screening level. Although camping is not allowed in any land-use scenario being contemplated, the ravine area between the western and eastern potions of the Lower Main Meadow has historically been used for unsanctioned camping, and the environmental screening level will need to reflect the realities of the situation. Higher concentrations of lead are located within the ravine area and are unsafe. Despite signage, education, and enforcement efforts throughout the last few years, encampments occur now and may occur in the future. The more restrictive standard reinforces the health and safety concerns in future planning and site management. The County has also requested surface water testing.

The testing will need to occur next year during the rainy season. City staff remain hopeful that the soils characterization will be complete when these activities are performed and the report is updated.

Soils Contamination in Relation to Use
Due to the characteristics of the skeet shooting use, a large portion of the Lower Main Meadow and surrounding area is covered with some degree of lead, resulting from shot and spent cartridges, and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), resulting from clay target spoils. The screening levels being used to evaluate the contaminants consider exposure pathways in relation to the safety of human receptors. The primary uses of the site being evaluated include recreational use as well as unrestricted land-use (farm workers and unsanctioned campers). The recreational user has less direct exposure pathways, frequency, and duration of contact with the soil and a higher level of contamination is safe when compared to an unrestricted land use, whereas the unrestricted land use assumes more direct contact for extended periods of time on a more frequent basis. Trail segments currently cross portions of the affected area. Trail users typically walk across the areas and do not spend a lot of time interacting with the soil. Farm workers or unauthorized campers, on the other hand, dig or live directly on the impacted soil for extended periods of time. For example, the lead screening levels being applied for recreational use is 540 milligrams per kilogram which is much less restrictive than the unrestricted use at 80 milligrams per kilogram. The distribution of contamination exceeding the recreational and unrestricted levels is shown on Attachments “Areas Exceeding Screening Level for Recreational Trail Use” and “Areas Exceeding Screening Levels for Unrestricted Land Use”. Areas encircled with yellow exceed the lead screening level and areas encircled with orange exceed the PAH screening level.

42.4 County staff have indicated that some level of clean-up may be required at the site, even if farming does not occur. Engineering controls, such as fencing and signage, will need to be implemented to prevent access into some areas of the site, such as the ravine where unsanctioned camping occurs. Farming cannot occur in any area above the unrestricted land use level and clean-up will be necessary to accommodate the use.

Feasibility Evaluation for Remediating the Contaminated Portions of the Meadow to Allow for Farming
RMD evaluated the feasibility of how to effectively remediate the contamination to allow for farming to occur (Attachment "Clean-up Feasibility Evaluation"). The most practical and effective method for remediating the site involves removing and disposing of contaminated soils.

In order for farming to occur, all contaminated soil above the unrestricted levels would need to be removed from the meadow area. It is estimated that an average one foot depth of soil would need to be removed from 270,000 square feet for a total of 10,000 cubic yards, or the equivalent of five hundred 20-cubic-yard dump truck loads of dirt. To perform the effort, it is anticipated that temporary construction roads would need to be constructed to be used by heavy equipment as part of staging, soil loading, and off-site transport. Soil would likely need to be stockpiled onsite for confirmation sampling and waste disposal characterization. Dump trucks would then transport it for disposal. Clean soil would also need to be sourced and delivered from off-site locations, and would be trucked in, backfilled, and compacted to project specifications.

The estimated cost of this effort would be $5-6 million. The costs do not include the various permitting requirements for crossing a wetland, any mitigations under CEQA, or the implementation of the Erosion Control Plan/Stormwater Pollution Prevention requirements. If the project was completely funded, it the work could be completed during one dry season.

Challenges to the Clean-up Effort
The most effective way to address the contamination is to remove and dispose of it. There are numerous challenges that will need to be evaluated and addressed as part of the effort. For one, the contamination is located within sensitive habitats, including wetlands and a forested ravine.

Removing the soil in the eastern portion of the Lower Main Meadow may require heavy equipment and dump trucks to cross a seasonal wetland area. Staff have confirmed with regulatory agencies that there will be permitting restrictions and mitigations for the use of heavy equipment crossing the area or for the construction of temporary access roads, all of which add costs, time, and uncertainty. Additionally, there are questions regarding how to prepare the site once any soil is removed and where to appropriately source the large quantities of soil to replace the removed soil.

Given the widespread contamination and costs for remediation, staff believes that it will be crucial that the final remediation plan allows for both smaller and larger remediation efforts to occur, as grant funding awards vary greatly and the full extent of contamination will not likely be addressed in one clean-up effort.

Next Steps
In the short-term, staff will work with RMD and the County on a Site Management Plan which will guide maintenance work, such as vegetation maintenance, and the installation of engineering controls, such as fencing and signage, to keep people out of the affected areas. Despite efforts to educate campers of the situation and posted signage, there continues to be unsanctioned camping within the ravine, which is a health and safety issue. Staff have discussed with the County the

42.5 possibility of installing cattle grazing fencing around the perimeter of the ravine with additional signage as a clearer way to signal to the campers and others that it is unsafe to be there. County staff have mentioned that this short-term solution would be acceptable provided the City continue to pursue grant funding to remediate the land.

Parks and Recreation staff applied for site specific environmental investigation funding through the Department of Toxic Substances Control’s Equitable Community Revitalization Grant. On June 7, 2022, DTSC informed staff that the award will be funded. Staff scoped the grant to cover the costs to complete the soils characterization to address County concerns, develop a remedial action plan and site management plan for the farming and recreational uses, hold a community meeting to discuss the approach and collect feedback, develop plans for the grading, erosion control, and re-vegetation at the site, perform CEQA review, and to receive permits from the City, Regional Water Quality Control Board, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, and Army Corps of Engineers. The primary focus of the project area would be meadow areas where farming is planned to occur. The scope of work would be implemented by June 2024, which is a tight timeframe given the environmental review process and permitting processes. At that point in time, the City would be in a solid position to apply for grant funding to implement a remediation project.

Health in All Policies: These efforts support the City’s Health in All Policies Framework because they aim to evaluate and remediate contaminants from a natural environment and reduce park users’ exposure to contaminants.

FISCAL IMPACT: DTSC grant funding will cover the costs of planning and permitting remediation of the Lower Main Meadow. The actual remediation costs of $5-6 million will need to be covered by future grants such as DTSC’s Equitable Communities Revitalization Grant or the Environmental Protection Agency’s Brownfields grant, private donations, or the City’s General Fund. Funding which was previously approved for the Pogonip Master Plan amendment process will be returned to the City’s General Fund after the County verifies that no additional soils investigations are necessary.

Prepared By:

Noah Downing
Park Planner
Submitted By:

Tony Elliot
Director of Parks &
Recreation
Approved By:

Matt Huffaker
City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:

1. OCTOBER 21, 2021 LETTER FROM HOMELESS GARDEN PROJECT.PDF

2. DECEMBER 7, 2021 LETTER TO CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION.PDF

3. FEBRUARY 2, 2022 LETTER FROM CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION.PDF

4. PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMENTS.PDF

5. FEBRUARY 9, 2022 EMAIL FROM HOMELESS GARDEN PROJECT.PDF

6. REVISED ADDITIONAL SOIL REPORT AND HHSE 2022-02-17.PDF

7. MARCH 25, 2022 LETTER FROM COUNTY OF SANTA CRUZ ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DIVISION.PDF

8. CLEAN-UP FEASIBILITY EVALUATION.PDF

9. AREAS EXCEEDING SCREENING LEVEL FOR RECREATIONAL TRAIL USE.PDF

42.6 10. AREAS EXCEEDING SCREENING LEVELS FOR UNRESTRICTED LAND USE.PDF

42.7 Contact Farm Downtown Store
PO Box 617 Delaware at Shaffer Rd 1338 Pacific Ave.

Santa Cruz, CA 95061 Santa Cruz, CA Santa Cruz, CA
831.426.3609 831.295.6328
[email protected]
www.homelessgardenproject.org
October 21, 2021
Dear Tony,
On behalf of the Homeless Garden Project community, I am so grateful that the City is moving forward with our request, dated July 16, 2021 to formally initiate a minor Amendment to the Pogonip Master Plan in order for the Homeless Garden Project (HGP) to relocate its farm on the upper meadow at Pogonip rather than the previously approved lower meadow.

At the September 28, 2021 council meeting, the Council unanimously approved a motion including the following item:

Direct staff to prepare an evaluation of the process for remediating contamination in the lower meadow to residential/agricultural standards, including an estimate of costs and timeline, and to circulate an update to the City Council for consideration in the process, as soon as possible.

In the discussion following the motion, you mentioned that the remediation plan will depend on what the Homeless Garden Project use is in the lower meadow. I’m writing to follow up on that question.

We believe that through this process, the upper meadow will be determined to be a more appropriate site for our farm, as stated in my July 16 letter. However, we understand that part of the process for considering our proposal is identifying alternatives. If the lower meadow is to be considered a viable alternative for our use, it should be remediated to allow for the use defined in our design permit, including approximately 9 acres of farm land and our farm center buildings.

Please don’t hesitate to reach out if you would like clarification or have a question.

Thank you so much for your collaboration on this project that will provide many benefits to our community; I look forward to continuing the partnership.

Sincerely,
Darrie Ganzhorn
Executive Director

42.8 42.9

42.10 42.11

42.12 42.13

42.14 42.15
State of California • Natural Resources Agency Gavin Newsom, Governor DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION Armando Quintero, Director P.O. Box 942896 • Sacramento, CA 94296-0001
(916) 653-7423
February 2, 2022
Tony Elliot, Director Sent via Email Only
Santa Cruz Parks & Recreation Dept. [email protected] City of Santa Cruz
323 Church Street
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
Re: Pogonip Park – Homeless Garden Project Farm and Garden Proposal Dear Tony Elliot:

On behalf of the California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR), the Office of Grants and Local Services (OGALS) provides this letter to the City of Santa Cruz (City) in response to your December 7, 2021 letter. Your letter, along with additional documentation provided, outlines the City’s proposal to devote an area of Pogonip Park (Park) to farming and gardening.

The garden would be operated and maintained by the non-profit organization called the “Homeless Garden Project”. As indicated by your letter and during our December 7, 2021 meeting, the City reached out to OGALS to request a legal review of the City’s proposal to determine if the farm and garden proposal is allowable according to the terms of the grant contracts that provided funding to the Park and in accordance with state statute.

Based on the documentation provided by the City, and legal review of the grant contracts and state statute, the DPR Legal Office concluded that the farm and garden proposal does not violate the terms of the grant contracts or statute. The farm and garden proposal falls under the definition of “open space” as defined by CA Government Code sec. 65560(h)(2), and open space land is defined as a way to accomplish acquisition of Pogonip Park in Public Resources Code 5907(3)(L).

If you have questions, or wish to discuss the above information further, please contact me at [email protected]
Sincerely,
Jean Lacher, Chief
Office of Grants and Local Services
cc: Lee Butterfield, Manager, Office of Grants and Local Services Parveen Kasraee, Staff Counsel, Department of Parks and Recreation

42.16 Water Department – Preliminary Comments

42.17 WATER DEPARTMENT
Water Conservation  212 Locust Street, Suite B, Santa Cruz, CA 95060  Ph: 831-420-5230 October 29, 2021
Noah Downing
Parks Planner
re: Proposal to relocate the Homeless Garden Project
Per your request to conduct a preliminary review of the proposed project, it has been determined that the scope of the relocation of the Homeless Garden Project will not meet the criteria for the applicability of the City Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (WELO). The City ordinance, does not apply to projects that involve the agricultural use of water.

Upon the presentation of the proposed project for Planning review, the Water Conservation Office staff that administers the City Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance will provide formal comment regarding the status of WELO applicability.

Thank you for your consideration of the City Efficient Landscape Ordinance.

Sincerely,
Neal Christen
Water Conservation Representative
(831) 420-5235

42.18 Homeless Garden Project’s Relocation to the Upper Main Meadow Water Department’s Preliminary Comments – 01/13/2022
These preliminary comments are based on the very conceptual proposal and the final comments will depend on the type and use of the structures placed in the Upper Meadow:
• Domestic service and meter size shall be determined by a water-using fixture count of the proposed structures.
o The domestic service shall either be a separate service (lateral, meter, and property side plumbing) installed as per SCWD Detail 5 & 8 or combined with the fire service as per SCWD Detail “Standard 6” & Larger Combination Fire & Domestic Meter Installation.” o Water System Development Charge will be determined based on the water meter size required to serve the proposed water-using fixtures, regardless of installation method. • Fire service size shall be determined by Fire Department requirements o A minimum size 6” fire service is required to serve 6” fire hydrants as per SCWD Standard Detail 9 (or SCWD Detail “Standard 6” & Larger Combination Fire & Domestic Meter Installation” if a Combination Fire & Domestic Service is proposed). • Final determination of water service installation is dependent on the review of civil and architectural plans.

42.19 Public Works Department – Preliminary
Comments

42.20 P u b l i c W o r k s D e p a r t m e n t
809 Center Street, Room 201 Santa Cruz, CA 95060, 831-420-5160, FAX 831-420-5161 Dear Applicant,
Public Works has reviewed the proposed amendments to the 1998 Master Plan (Homeless Garden Project) and will require the following conditions;  Sanitary Sewer – (Option A) Project will require a sanitary sewer main extension to the property for City service. The sewer main will need to be designed by a Professional Engineer and the project will be responsible for the costs of design and construction. (Option B) Applicant can look into installing a new sewer septic system that would need to be approved by the City Council and The County of Santa Cruz Environmental Health Dept. if feasible.
 Traffic Impact Fee - A Traffic Impact Fee will be assessed by the Public Works Department and shall be paid prior to issuance of the building permit.  Golf Club Dr. – The project will require a 20’ wide A.C. street to be designed and installed that leads to the proposed site.
 Security Gate – A new gate will be required to be installed to limit the public from accessing the proposed site for security reasons. The Fire Dept. and other emergency agencies will need access also.
 Traffic Control – New access road will require proper traffic control signage that meets MUTCD standards and will be approved by the Public Works Traffic Engineering Division.
 Parking Lot(s) – All proposed parking lot(s) will need to comply with ADA accessibility. All parking spaces will require a 24’ minimum back up distance.

Thanks, Curtis Busenhart (Engineering Associate PW)

42.21 Homeless Garden Project
Storm Water Preliminary Comments-12/3/21

1. Storm Water Requirements: The Project is subject to the City Development and Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) Post-Construction (PCR) requirements. Plan sheets shall demonstrate that the project will meet the requirements in Chapter 6B of the City's Best Management Practices Manual-Storm Water BMPs for Private and Public Development Projects, which is available at www.cityofsantacruz.com/LID. Please contact Suzanne Healy, Associate Planner-PW, at [email protected] or 831-420-5131, for assistance with the storm water requirements.

2. Per Chapter 6B of the Storm Water Development BMPs, the project shall submit the following items in addition to the plan sheets:
a. Appendix A Worksheet: The Storm Water and Low-Impact Development BMP Requirement Worksheet (Appendix A Worksheet) is available in Chapter 6B of the City's Best Management Practices Manual Storm Water BMPs for Private and Public Development Projects (please see www.cityofsantacruz.com/LID). A preliminary Appendix A LID Worksheet shall be submitted with plans for development approval. (The final Appendix A LID Worksheet shall be submitted with the Building Permit application.)
b. Storm Water Control Plan (SWCP) Report: applies to projects subject to PCR Tiers 2-4.

A preliminary SWCP report shall be submitted with plan designs demonstrating that the project meets the requirements in Chapter 6B of the City's Best Management Practices Manual- Storm Water BMPs for Private and Public Development Projects and the applicable RWQCB Post-Construction Requirements (PCRs) tiers. For example, a Tier 4 project shall meet Tier 1, Tier 2, Tier 3 and Tier 4.

The SWCP report shall follow the outline in Chapter 6B, Appendix B, and shall be submitted in an 8 ½ x 11 inch report format. An electronic copy of the SWCP may be emailed to Suzanne Healy, Associate Planner, at [email protected]. (A final SWCP report shall be submitted as part of the project’s Building Permit application and include the Engineer’s Certification of Compliance with the RWQCB Post-Construction (PCR) requirements.) In the SWCP Report and on the SWCP sheet, please include a DMA & SCM table that itemizes each DMA and its respective SCM. For each SCM, please include a column for the minimum area required to meet each applicable RWQCB PCR Tier and an adjacent column(s) for the area provided.

Please refer to City of Santa Cruz “Storm Water Best Management Practices For Private and Public Development Projects” Appendix B for an outline of what shall be included in the Storm Water Control Plan report. Please revise report to adhere to this outline. Also, please see the Storm Water Checklist included in the Design Permit Application materials as to what should be included in the project plan sheets and SWCP report (Checklist is attached).

42.22 c. Operations and Maintenance Plan (O&M Plan): A preliminary O&M Plan shall be submitted as part of the Design Permit application. The O&M Plan shall include at a minimum: 1) site plan showing the location of drainage structures and structural control measures; 2) O&M procedures, timing, and maintenance frequency for the LID features and drainage systems, and include applicable BMPs from Chapter 6B of the City's Storm Water BMPs for Development Projects; 3) cost estimates for maintenance; and 4) BMPs for any Special Site Conditions (see pages 30-31), e.g. trash enclosure, parking, etc. (The final O&M Plan shall be submitted as part of the Building Permit application.)
The O&M Plan shall be submitted in an 8 ½ x 11 inch report format, and can be included as a SWCP appendix. The signed Maintenance Agreement shall be included in the O&M Plan as an attachment. Please email an electronic copy of the O&M Plan to Suzanne Healy, Associate Planner, at [email protected] in lieu of a paper submittal if possible.

3. Storm Water Source Control: Additional source control measures are required If the project will include any of the following site conditions: commercial/industrial facilities, material storage areas, vehicle fueling/maintenance/wash areas, equipment and accessory wash areas, parking garages, outdoor parking areas, pools/spas/water features, trash storage areas, and food service or food processing facilities.

Please include such control measures/BMPs in the site plan, the storm water control plan and operation and maintenance plan, and please check the appropriate boxes in Appendix A-SW LID Checklist, Section F. b (on page 3). Please see the City Storm Water BMPs for Private and Public Development Projects (available at www.cityofsantacruz.com/lid) for additional information.

4. Storm Water Capture: All drainage shall be captured and contained prior to entering the City right-of-way and cannot sheet flow over the sidewalk or driveway approach. All drain lines entering the public right-of-way shall remain within the lateral projections of the property lines and shall not encroach in front of adjacent property frontages.

5. Please pipe all storm water discharges to the city storm drain system via an underground connection as directed by the PW Reviewer, Curtis Busenhart. Storm water discharges via a curb drain to the street gutter should be avoided.

6. All storm water facilities, such as BMPs and features included to meet the PCRs, shall be located on the project parcel. For example, bio-treatment and bio-retention areas etc. may not be located in the City ROW. Please confer with the PW Reviewer, Curtis Busenhart, prior to proposing any storm drainage inlets, piping or cleanouts in the City ROW. Please revise plan sheets accordingly.

7. Geotechnical Information: Please submit recent Geotechnical information or a report confirming that that proposed design is feasible and in compliance with the applicable storm water requirements.

42.23 Information for the Building Permit application phase:

1. Maintenance Agreement: Prior to issuance of the Building Permit, the property owner shall sign and submit a BMP maintenance agreement ensuring that they will provide long-term operation and maintenance of structural storm water control measures (see template in Appendix C of Chapter 6B Storm Water BMPs for Private and Public Development Projects). The signed maintenance agreement should be attached to the O&M Plan. Please email a pdf of the signed Maintenance Agreement to Suzanne Healy, Associate Planner, at: [email protected]. The signed Maintenance Agreement with original ink signature may be submitted via the Building Counter.

The Maintenance Agreement shall be included in the HOA agreement and/or recorded in the CCRs with proof of CCR recordation submitted to the City. (if applicable) The O&M Plan shall be included or referenced in the CCRs as well. Please email a copy of the CCRs to Suzanne Healy at:
[email protected].

2. State Construction General Permit: If the project will disturb one acre or more of soil (or is less than one acre but part of a larger development), a Notice of Intent (NOI) must be filed with the State Water Resource Control Board (SWRCB) to obtain coverage under the NPDES General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activities (Construction General Permit) prior to commencing work. The applicant is responsible for filing a Notice of Intent and for developing a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP).

If subject to the CGP, prior to issuance of a demo, grading or building permit, the applicant shall provide the City with proof of coverage under the State Construction General Permit, including a copy of the letter of receipt and Waste Discharger Identification (WDID) number issued by the SWRCB that acknowledges the property owner’s submittal of a complete Notice of Intent (NOI) package. Please submit an electronic copy of the site’s Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) submitted to the State. For information on the Construction General Permit, please see the State Water Board website:
http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/stormwater/construction.shtml

3. Construction Dewatering Operations: There are several options for construction dewatering discharges that can’t be managed on site. One potential option is discharge under a permit from the State Water Board/Regional Water Quality Control Board (e.g. Low-Threat Discharge Permits, Highly Treated Groundwater Discharge Permit, etc.). Please contact the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board for more information at 805-549-3147 or refer to their website at:
http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/centralcoast/
Another option is discharge to the sanitary sewer system under a permit from the City. For more information about this permit, including the application process, requirements and fees, please contact a City Public Works Environmental Compliance Inspector at 831-420-5160.

42.24 D

1. City
 SFD
wit
Sin
 Pro
dem
Ma
ava
* Please
based o
Constru
https://w
ydromo

2. Storm
All proje
Checklist
For the a
 C
S
OR
 C
P
Both doc

3. Preli
This requ
surface a
The preli
drainage
Department o
Storm Wa
FD/Duplex <
th Chapter 6
ngle-Family
ojects creati
monstrate co
anual-Storm
ailable at ww
e note that th
on the Centra
uction Requi
www.waterb
od_charette_
m Water a
cts shall com
t (Appendix A
applicable Ap
Chapter 6A o
ingle-Family
Chapter 6B o
rivate and P
cuments are a
iminary St
uirement app
area.
iminary SWC
design and
of Public Wor
List
ater Devel
15,000 SF Im
6A of the Cit
Homes on S
ing or replac
ompliance w
Water BMP
ww.cityofsan
he City Storm
al Coast Reg
irements per
boards.ca.go
_index.html
and LID A
mplete and s
A).
ppendix A c
of the City's B
y Homes on
f the City's B
ublic Develo
available at:
torm Wate
plies to proje
CP sheet and
storm water
rks • 809 Cen
Storm W
t of Required
lopment R
Impervious A
ty's Best Man
Small Lots (a
cing over 2,5
with Chapter
Ps for Private
ntacruz.com/
m Water De
gional Water
r Resolution
v/centralcoa
Assessmen
ubmit the ap
hecklist, ple
Best Manage
Small Lots
Best Manage
opment Proj
www.cityof
er Contro
ects that incl
d associated
BMPs are fe
nter Street • R
Water Che
d Applicatio
Requireme
Area - Projec
nagement Pr
available at w
500 SF of Ne
6B of the Ci
e and Public
/LID.
velopment R
r Quality Con
R3-2013-00
ast/water_iss
nt Checklis
pplicable Sto
ease refer to:
ement Practi
ement Practi
ects
fsantacruz.co
ol Plan (SW
lude 5,000 s
“Details” sh
feasible and w
Room 201 • S
cklist
on Materials
ents
ct plans shall
ractices Man
www.cityofs
et Imperviou
ity's Best Ma
c Developme
Requirement
ntrol Board
032. Please s
sues/program
st
orm Water a

ices Manual
ices Manual
om/LID.

WCP) She
square feet o
heet shall de
will properly
Santa Cruz, C
l demonstrat
nual Storm W
fsantacruz.co
us Area - Pro
anagement P
ent Projects,
ts in Chapter
(RWQCB) P
see:
ms/stormwat
and LID Asse
l Storm Wate
Storm Wate
et
or more of ne
emonstrate th
y function to
CA 95060
te complianc
Water BMPs
om/LID); or
oject plans sh
Practices
which is
r 6A and 6B
Poster/docs/lid/l
essment
er BMPs for
er BMPs for
et imperviou
hat the propo
o meet the C
ce
s for
hall
B are
id_h
r
r
us
osed
City

42.25 Storm Water Development Requirements (Chapter 6B) and RWQCB PCRs. The SWCP sheet and associated “Details” sheet must be prepared by a licensed civil engineer.

The preliminary SWCP sheet shall include:
 Locations of existing or proposed storm drain inlets on or adjacent to the property  Show any storm water flows or “run-on” from adjacent parcels and indicate how this will be addressed.
 Distance from each disconnected downspout, e.g. flowing to landscaping or similar, to adjacent property line(s)
 Provide slopes, grades/elevations and flow direction for proposed storm water conveyance systems, LID and structural BMPs, associated piping, inlets and outlets to demonstrate that the proposed project design will be in compliance with the RWQCB PCRs and City Chapter 6B requirements.
 Provide a detail for each storm water BMP and a preliminary cross-section for a bioswale or bio-retention facility. Detail and cross-section shall include dimensions and show over-flow piping, inlets, outlets, and “free-board” based on preliminary design.  For projects proposing infiltration or bio-retention BMPs, demonstrate there is sufficient depth/space between the bottom of the proposed BMP (e.g. bio-retention basin) and the top of groundwater or seasonal high water table. Typically the minimum space requirement is 3 feet however it may vary/increase depending upon site. Provide depths.

4. Preliminary Storm Water Control Plan (SWCP) Report
This requirement applies to projects that include 5,000 square feet or more of net impervious surface area. The SWCP must be prepared by a licensed civil engineer.

The preliminary SWCP report shall demonstrate that the proposed project will meet the requirements of the City Storm Water Development Requirements (Chapter 6B) and RWQCB PCRs. The preliminary SWCP report shall be in an 8 ½ x 11 inch report format and follow the outline in Chapter 6B, Appendix B. In addition, the preliminary SWCP report shall include:
 List and description of LID methods and BMPs proposed to meet each of the applicable RWQCB PCR tiers.
 Calculations for the proposed LID methods and BMPs verifying that BMP sizing is correct and in compliance with the RWQCB PCRs.
 Drawdown time of each proposed BMP if applicable.
 Depth to groundwater (or note if none encountered at specified depth).  Information on how any storm water flows or “run-on” from adjacent parcels will be addressed. Please include flow estimate.

5. Preliminary Operations and Maintenance Plan (O&M Plan) This requirement applies to:
 Projects between 2,500-5,000 SF of net impervious surface area if a structural storm water BMP is proposed.
 Projects equal to or greater than 5,000 SF of net impervious surface area.

42.26 The preliminary O&M Plan shall include: 1) draft site plan showing drainage structures and storm water control measures; 2) draft O&M procedures, timing, and frequency for maintenance of LID features and drainage systems; 3) draft maintenance cost estimates; and 4) BMPs for any Special Site Conditions (see pages 30-31), e.g. trash enclosure, parking, etc.

6. Civil Sheets
This requirement applies to projects that include 5,000 square feet or more of net impervious surface area, although smaller projects may also provide civil sheets. a. Design plans shall include supporting civil sheets prepared by a licensed civil engineer. Each sheet shall have the following unless not applicable for that specific sheet: Title block, North arrow, Scale, Legend, Abbreviations list and Key, Standard Notes, property lines, adjacent street and alleyways, and Detail references.
b. The following information shall be included on at least one of the following sheets: Utility, Drainage and SWCP:
 Limits of project disturbance.
 Location of natural features, e.g. waterbodies and conservation areas, and setbacks.  Location of existing and proposed sewer, water and storm drain lines, manholes, inlets, outlets, etc.
 Location of existing and proposed utility, sewer, water and storm drain easements.  Existing and proposed topography, drainage patterns and flow paths (onto and off site).

Include sufficient spot grading and slopes to demonstrate that the storm water design is feasible and will meet the applicable RWQCB PCR standards. Show that existing drainage patterns will be maintained.
 Location of existing and proposed impervious areas including buildings, driveways, patios, parking areas, and trash enclosure.
 Locations of downspouts and discharge points.
 Roof plan on civil sheets consistent with roof plan on architectural sheets if known.  Building Finish Floor Elevations if known.
 Location of existing and proposed storm water conveyance systems including piping, inlets and outlets, French drains, and areas of overland release.  Location of all BMPs proposed to meet the RWQCB PCRs and the City Storm Water Development requirements including (as applicable): permeable pavers or pavement, swales, bio-retention facilities, structural BMPs for water quality treatment, flow control devices, detention BMPs, and other Low Impact Design features, etc. Include grades, dimensions, and direction of flow.
 If the project will include a bio-retention facility, show applicable slopes, spot elevations, and dimensions of the bio-retention facility.

42.27 7. Storm Water Additional Information
This requirement applies to Commercial or Multi-Family projects equal to or greater than 2,500 square feet of new and replaced impervious surface area as applicable.  If proposing to discharge or infiltrate storm water on a slope equal to or greater than 10%, please provide a statement or Geotechnical letter confirming slope stability and approval of preliminary design plan.
 If the project will use infiltration or retention to comply with RWQCB PCRs Tiers 2-4, please submit information regarding soil permeability. The information shall indicate that the proposed BMPs are feasible and will be effective at meeting the requirements. This information may be: a soils report; infiltration, percolation or permeability test results; a hydrologic or geotechnical report; or other summary or documentation.

Abbreviations:
-ADU: Accessory Dwelling Unit
-Appendix A: Storm Water and LID Assessment Checklist from the City’s Development Best Management Practices brochures. There is an Appendix A per Chapter 6A and an Appendix A per Chapter 6B depending upon the type of project. For example, please use Appendix A from Chapter 6A for small residential projects. Chapter 6B is for commercial, industrial or multifamily (3 or more units) projects or a single family residential project >15,000 SF. -BMPs: Best Management Practices
-City Storm Water Development Requirements: Chapter 6A of the City's Best Management Practices Manual Storm Water BMPs for Single-Family Homes on Small Lots (Chapter 6A) or Chapter 6B of the City's Best Management Practices Manual Storm Water BMPs for Private and Public Development Projects (Chapter 6B). Both documents are available at:
www.cityofsantacruz.com/LID.
-Net impervious surface area: Net equals new and replaced impervious area minus any reduced impervious area credit
-PCRs or PCR Standards: Post-Construction Requirements per the RWQCB, Resolution R3- 2013-0032, effective March 2014
-PCR Tiers: As applicable, the RWQCB PCR Tiers include: Tier 1 (Site Design & Runoff Reduction); Tier 2 (Water Quality Treatment); Tier 3 (Runoff Retention); Tier 4 (Peak Management).
-RWQCB: Regional Water Quality Control Board (Central Coast) -SF-Square Feet
-SFD-Single Family Dwelling
-SWCP sheet: Storm Water Control Plan sheet
-SWCP report: Storm Water Control Plan report (8 ½ x 11 inch format)

42.28 Fire Department – Preliminary Comments

42.29 Homeless Garden Project’s Relocation to the Upper Main Meadow Fire Department’s Preliminary Comments – 12/16/21
These preliminary comments are based on the very conceptual proposal and the final comments will depend on the type and use of the structures placed in the Upper Meadow:
• Any structure that is built will be required to have Fire Sprinklers and a Monitored Fire Alarm. o There may be an exception to a greenhouse, but it depends on size and location. o Based on the proposed use, the current clubhouse may be required to have Fire Sprinklers.
• Fire hydrants will be required within 250 feet of any structure. • Fire flow and pressure need will be determined when the proposed structure is submitted. o Based on the project at the Lower Meadow, it’s going to be difficult to get adequate pressure and flow with the existing water line from River St, so a tank and fire pump will most likely be required. Again, this will be based on the structures placed up there. • Fire Hydrants should be placed every 1,000 feet on the access road (some flexibility on the requirement)
• The access road will need to be a minimum 20’ wide Fire Access road with turnouts every 500 feet.
• The turnaround at the termination of Fire Access road will need to comply with 2019 CFC Appendix D.
• All Structures will need to be compliant with WUI building requirements per 2019 CFC Chapter

49. 42.30
Planning and Community Development
Department – Preliminary Comments

42.31 H:\Projects\Homeless Garden Project\Upper Main Meadow\Preliminary Review Comments\Homeles Garden Project.Preliminary Response.docx

PLANNING AND COMMUNITY

DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Building and Safety Division
John Gervasoni, Chief Building Official
City Hall Annex, 809 Center St., Rm. 102
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
Telephone: (831) 420-5119 FAX: (831) 420-5434
Homeless Garden Project’s Relocation to the Upper Main Meadow Building and Safety Division Preliminary Comments
These preliminary comments noted by reference to the page(s) submitted for review and comment are based on the revised conceptual proposal and any final comments will depend on the final type and use of the structures and amenities placed in the Upper Meadow or areas providing access to the Upper Meadow:

• Please also refer to CP17-0109 for Building comments dated 6/27/17 that may be applicable to revised proposal.
• Please also refer to CP21-0182 with not yet provided Building comments for revised proposal to move HGP to Upper Meadow.
• Page ii – Parking – Please define small parking lot by specific number if it is to be developed as new. This accessible parking spaces, access aisles and pedestrian accessible routes and paths will determine of travel.
• Page 2-3 – Rehabilitated Clubhouse – No plans provided • Page 2-5 – Will require a demolition permit to remove existing structures. May also require testing for lead based paint and/or asbestos removal by certified CA state health or EPA inspector prior to removal.
• Page 2-5 – no plans to identify required accessible features, elements and facilities of CBC 11B.
• Page 2-7 – Lower Meadow Parking – Please define parking lot by specific number if it is to be developed as new. This accessible parking spaces, access aisles and pedestrian accessible routes and paths will determine of travel.
• Page 2-10 – Building permits required for new planned structures. • Page 2-11 – Building permits required for new planned structures. • Pages 5-2 through 7-5 no comments plans not provided.

John Gervasoni Chief Building Official/CASp
Planning and Community Development
Building and Safety Division
City of Santa Cruz
(831)420-5119

42.32 ZONING/PERMIT PROCESSING COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING,
831/420-5100 • FAX 831/420-5101 HOUSING AND

INSPECTION SERVICES COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
831/420-5120 • FAX 831/420-5101 831/420-6250 • FAX 831/420-6458 809 Center Street • Room 206 • Santa Cruz, CA 95060 • www.cityofsantacruz.com

LEE BUTLER, DIRECTOR
11/30/21
To: Noah Downing, Park Planner
City of Santa Cruz
Re: Homeless Garden Project
PO Box 617
Santa Cruz, CA 95061
[email protected]
RE: 501 Golf Club Dr. APN 001-211-01
Project: Proposed modification of the Pogonip Master Plan to relocate the approximately 9.5-acre Homeless Garden farm, supportive facilities, and ancillary buildings and structures from the previouslyapproved locations in the Pogonip Park Lower Meadow to the Upper Meadow near the existing Pogonip Park Clubhouse
Dear Noah,
Please refer to the following comments regarding the proposed relocation of the Homeless Garden’s approximately 9.5-acre farm from the previously-approved location in the Pogonip Park Lower Meadow to a new location of the Pogonip Park Upper Meadow. Please note that the following comments are based on the conceptual plans provided with the Homeless Garden’s letter to the Mayor and Members of the City Council dated July 16, 2021; additional comments will be provided upon submittal of formal plans and additional information necessary to constitute a formal application.

Information/Materials Required

1. Submit a formal Land Use Application form (attached) and all items necessary for staff review of the complete scope of work of the project. Note that payment of all Planning application review fees will be required along with submittal of the Land Use Application and required plans and documents. The following information and plans will need to be submitted; see details listed on page 3 and following of the Land Use Application:
a. Site plan
b. Utility plan, including infrastructure for provision of potable water, such as placement of any necessary water pump and/or extended water line, new/extended sanitary sewer infrastructure, etc.
c. Elevation plans of existing/proposed structures
d. Roof plan of existing/proposed structures
e. Demolition plan, as applicable
f. Landscape plan for all proposed ornamental (non-agricultural) plantings, as applicable g. Preliminary grading plan, as applicable
h. Topographic map

42.33 November 30, 2021
Homeless Garden Project – CP21-0182

Page 2 of 4 ends

i. Historic evaluation for any structure(s) proposed to be modified or demolished j. Arborist report, for any tree(s) proposed to be removed, as applicable k. Archaeological report
l. Biotic report
m. Geotechnical report
n. Completed Environmental Information Form (see attached) o. Supplemental forms, including the following (see attached):
i. Form 2 Project Design Data
ii. Form 4 Use Permit
iii. Form 12 Amendments

2. Provide a complete project description, including the following:
a. Number and use of buildings and accessory structures proposed to be constructed in the Upper Meadow area
b. Clarification of the overall site plan intent, including description of compatibility of proposed placement and use of buildings, parking, and agricultural operations with the existing Clubhouse (expected to be rehabilitated/renovated) in the proposed locations, which appear to occupy the areas intended for parking, amenity space, and landscaping of the rehabilitated Clubhouse as depicted and described in the Pogonip Master Plan c. Description of anticipated water and sewer demand of facilities and agricultural activities associated with Homeless Garden’s proposed relocation to the Upper Meadow d. Information regarding anticipated on-site average and maximum daily number of program participants, employees, volunteers and visitors e. Data regarding average and maximum number of program participants, employees, volunteers and visitors vehicles expected to be parked on-site f. Description of anticipated modification to the existing access road (configuration and/or width of the road, etc.) compared to that as depicted in the Pogonip Master Plan g. Description of strategy to preventing parking of program employees, participants, etc. in restricted-access (fire) lanes
h. Information regarding status of preparation of Garden Operations and Management Plan, as required by the Pogonip Master Plan
i. Description of farm equipment and methods proposed to be utilized, including narrative of potentially adverse environmental and/or nuisance impacts related to noise, vibration, etc., as applicable
j. Narrative of program for management of trash/recyclables, including proposed location of a designated trash/recyclables enclosure(s), receptacle(s)/cart(s), staging area (as applicable), and anticipated access by the waste hauler, including proposed route for pickup and haulaway
k. Information regarding proposed security measures to ensure access to facilities only by authorized individuals (employees, volunteers, visitors, etc.), as applicable l. Description of potentially adverse impacts to existing native vegetation, as applicable, of plant species proposed to be included in agricultural operations and/or landscaping; describe methods to be taken to avoid any such adverse effects to native vegetation by non-native (invasive) species
m. Description of anticipated impacts of farming operations to the West Santa Cruz Terrace groundwater basin, which underlies the subject area

42.34 November 30, 2021
Homeless Garden Project – CP21-0182

Page 3 of 4 ends

n. Description of agricultural/land management, construction, etc. methods proposed to avoid or mitigate potentially adverse impacts of the proposed project, and especially such techniques intended to prevent degradation or destruction of sensitive lands, including, but not limited to, Ohlone Tiger Beetle habitat; areas occupied by mimamounds; Palustrine Emergent Wetlands; Coastal Terrace Prairie; etc. o. Description of the project’s consistency with applicable provisions of the Pogonip Master Plan (link) and satisfaction of Municipal Code findings required for approval of a Special Use Permit (per City of Santa Cruz Municipal Code Section 24.08.050; link) and Design Permit (per City of Santa Cruz Municipal Code Section 24.08.430; link)

3. Note whether the project will require 50 cubic yards or greater of grading. If so, as listed on the City’s Land Use Application, required is submittal of cut-and-fill quantities. Note that, as listed in the City’s Land Use Application, if 50 cubic yards or greater or grading will be necessary associated with the project, a grading plan must be submitted, including:
a. Typical cross sections
b. Limits of grading
c. Existing and proposed contours. Contour interval shall be two feet for slopes up to 20% and 5 feet for slopes over 20%
d. Details and sections for new retaining walls including top and bottom of wall elevations, type of material, drainage for walls, temporary over excavation limits, type of wall construction
e. Winter/Summer shadow lines at 9:00 am, noon, and 3:00 pm on June 21st and December 21st
f. All structures on adjacent properties
g. Height and number of stories of adjacent structures
Entitlements and Review Required

1. Note that, based on the scope of work and plans submitted thus far, it is anticipated that approval of a Special Use Permit and Design Permit will be required for the proposed project. It is anticipated that the Planning Commission will review the proposal and make its recommendation to the City Council, and the City Council will make a final decision regarding approval of the project.

2. Note that the proposal is subject to review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and requires disclosure, assessment, and mitigation of the project’s potential for environmental impacts. It is anticipated that the environmental analysis will center on the potentially significant environmental impacts, based on established thresholds of significance, generated by modifications to the Homeless Garden’s agricultural operations compared to the environmental impacts as assessed and disclosed in the June 1998 Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prepared for the Pogonip Park Master Plan. Potential environmental impacts which have been disclosed following preparation of the 1998 EIR will also be included in the environmental assessment. Dependent on the results of an Initial Study, the proposed project will likely require preparation of a new, supplemental, amended, or focused EIR; addendum to the original EIR; or Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND). As part of the entitlement process, it is anticipated that the environmental document(s) prepared will be reviewed by the Planning Commission, with recommendation made to the City Council regarding adoption; adoption/certification by the City Council of the environmental document(s) is required. A third-party environmental consultant is

42.35 November 30, 2021
Homeless Garden Project – CP21-0182

Page 4 of 4 ends

expected to prepare the environmental analysis, with review by City staff. Please note that all costs associated with preparation of the environmental analysis by the outside consultant, in addition to costs of staff review of the environmental analysis, are expected to be paid by the Homeless Garden Project.

Advisory

1. Note that consultation with the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) will be required to determine the potential for a “take” regarding impacts to the Ohlone Tiger Beetle, in the form of preparation of a Habitat Conservation Plan. Information regarding the actions necessary under CEQA , including the applicant’s submitted narrative, will be referred to a third party for review, with costs related to review expected to be paid by the Homeless Garden Project.

2. Note that appropriate design and appearance of all proposed Homeless Garden Project facilities and site modifications, incorporating an aesthetic compatible to the Pogonip Park Open Space setting, are required.

3. Note that Bird-Safe Development Standards will apply to any structure proposed to be constructed within the areas proposed.

4. Proposed light standards/sources of illumination and details will require downlighting/use of shrouds to preclude occurrence of off-site glare per the requirements of Municipal Code Section

24.14.210, General Provisions (link). Note that adequate illumination must be provided for public safety, but which shall not impact any surrounding property due to excessive glare.

Submittal of the above-requested materials or corrections in one (1) package via the mycityofsantacruz.com portal is preferred. For plan revisions, please provide digital copies of all required documents via the mycityofsantacruz.com portal.

Feel free to contact me to further discuss the above items and to identify some potential solutions.

The City looks forward to working with you and your design team to resolve the above issues for this important and exciting project. Please feel free to contact me via phone at (831) 420-5129 or via email at [email protected] if you have any questions regarding this letter or the review and permit application process.

Sincerely,
Timothy Maier
Senior Planner
Attachments:

42.36 FRM ENV-03 -1- (Rev. 5/09)

Current Planning Division
Dept. of Planning and Community Development
809 Center Street, Room 206
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
(831) 420-5100
Environmental Information Form
(To Be Completed By Applicant)
This document will assist the City in evaluating the proposed project's potential environmental impacts.

Complete and accurate information will facilitate the environmental assessment process, and will minimize future requests for additional information.

APPLICANT'S STATEMENT OF INTENT (Describe the proposed project):

PROPERTY OWNER'S NAME:

Mailing Address:

Zip Code:

Telephone: Business: ( ) Home: ( )
APPLICANT'S/AGENT'S NAME:

Mailing Address:

Zip Code:

Telephone: Business: ( ) Home: ( )
Contact Person's Name: Phone:

SUBDIVISION NAME OR PROPOSED COMMON NAME FOR PROJECT:

PROJECT SITE INFORMATION (Attach legal description):

Property Address or Location:

Property Assessor Parcel Number(s):

Property Dimensions:

Property Area: Square footage (gross) (net)
Acreage (gross) (net)
Site Land Use (check one and explain): 2 Undeveloped or Vacant Land 3 Developed Existing General Plan Designation of Project Site: :

Existing Zoning of Project Site: Proposed Zoning of Site:

Project site in Coastal Zone? 4 Yes 5 No

42.37 FRM ENV-03 -2- (Rev. 5/09)
DESCRIBE ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE WITHIN 300 FEET OF PROJECT SITE:

Zone Existing Land Use (i.e., residential, commercial, industrial, office) North
South
East
West

PROPOSED BUILDING(S) CHARACTERISTICS
Size of New Structure(s) or Building Addition(s): Gross Sq. Ft.

Building Height (Measured from Ground to Highest Point): ft. No. of Floors:

Height of Other Appurtenances (Excluding Buildings) Measured from Ground to Highest Point (e.g., Antennas, Microwave Equipment, Solar Energy Equipment, Light Pole Standards, etc.):

Project Site Coverage: Building Coverage: sq. ft. %
Landscaped Area: sq. ft. %
Paved Surfaced Area: sq. ft. %
Total: sq. ft. %
Exterior Building Materials:

Exterior Building Colors:

Total No. of Off-Street Parking Spaces: On-Site Required: On-Site Proposed:

Proposed Off-Site Parking: Include a Permanent Maintenance Management Plan.

Total No. of Bicycle Spaces: Proposed: Required:

Covered: Uncovered:

Describe the Type of Exterior Lighting Proposed for the Project (height, intensity):

Building:

Parking:

Estimate the Total Construction Cost for the Project: $ Proposed Construction Starting Date:

Estimated Completion Date:

If the proposal is a component of an overall larger project, describe the phases and show them on the site plan:

Does this site include signage? 6 Yes 7 No If yes, please explain the following:

Height: Illumination:

Area: Type:

Dimensions: Colors/Materials:

Location (on-/off-site):

42.38 FRM ENV-03 -3- (Rev. 5/09)

SITE CHARACTERISTICS
Are there any natural or man-made drainage channels through or adjacent to the project site? 8 Yes 9 No If yes, show on site plan and explain:

Are there any trees or shrubs on the project site? 10 Yes 11 No If yes, plot on site plan by size and type and indicate which are proposed for removal.

Are there any structures on the project site? 12 Yes 13 No If yes, plot on the site plan and explain the following:

Present use of existing structure(s):

Proposed use of existing structure(s):

Are any structures occupied?
Are any structures to be demolished?
Describe age, condition, size and architectural style of all existing on-site structures (include photos):

RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS ONLY
Total Lots: Total Dwelling Units: Total Acreage:

Net Density/Acre: Gross Density/Acre:

Single- Two-Family Multi-Family Multi-Family
Family Duplex/Halfplex (Apartments) (Condominiums)
Number of Units:

Acreage:

Sq. Ft. per Unit:

For Sale or Rent:

Price Range:

Type of Unit:

Studio:

One-Bedroom:

Two-Bedroom:

Three-Bedroom:

Four-Bedroom:

Usable Open Space/Unit:

Private:

Common:

Total:

42.39 FRM ENV-03 -4- (Rev. 5/09)

RETAIL, COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL, INSTITUTIONAL, OR OTHER PROJECT (If project is only residential, do not answer this section.) Type(s) of Use(s):

Oriented to: Regional: City: Neighborhood:

Hours of Operation:

Total Occupancy/Capacity of Building(s):

Total Number of Fixed Seats:

Square Footage of: Warehouse Area:

Office Area: Loading Area:

Sales Area: Storage Area:

Total Number of Employees:

Anticipated Number of Employees per Shift:

Total Number of Visitors/Customers On Site at any One Time:

Other Occupants (specify):

PROJECT EFFECTS
Are the following items applicable to the project or its effects? Discuss below all items checked "yes" (attach additional sheets as necessary).

Yes Maybe No

1. Change in existing features of any bays, tidelands,
beaches.
14 15 16

2. Change in scenic views or vistas from existing residential areas or public lands or roads.
17 18 19

3. Change in pattern, scale, or character of general area of project.
20 21 22

4. Significant amounts of solid waste or litter. 23 24 25

5. Change in dust, ash, smoke, fumes or odors in vicinity. 26 27 28

6. Change in ocean, bay, lake, stream or ground water
quality or quantity, or alteration of existing drainage patterns.
29 30 31

7. Substantial change in existing noise or vibration levels in the vicinity.
32 33 34

8. Site on filled land or on slope of 10% or more. 35 36 37

9. Use of disposal of potentially hazardous materials, such as toxic substances, flammables or explosives.
38 39 40

10. Substantial change in demand for municipal services (police, fire, water, sewage, etc.)
41 42 43

11. Substantially increased fossil fuel consumption (electricity, oil, natural gas, etc.)
44 45 46

12. Relationship to a larger project or series of projects. 47 48 49 Discussion:

42.40 FRM ENV-03 -5- (Rev. 5/09)

PREVIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS
If this project is part of any other project for which a Negative Declaration or Environmental Impact Report has been prepared, reference the document below (include date and case number, if applicable).

OTHER PERMITS OR APPROVALS
List any and all other public approvals required for this project. Specify type of permits or approval, agency/department, address, person to contact, and her/his telephone number.

Permit or Approval Agency Address Contact Person Phone No.

As the applicant for this proposal, I hereby state that, to the best of my knowledge, the above answers and statements are true and complete.

Signature of Applicant/Agent Date

Print Name and Title of Applicant/Agent Phone No.

42.41 P:\_Public\Dept Forms\Land Use Application\Forms 2-16\Form 2 Project Design Data.docx

2. Project Design Data

1. Area and Coverage Sq. Ft. % Site
a. Lot Size (dimensions) ft. x ft.
b. Total Land Area _ sq.ft.
c. Proposed Floor Area first: sq.ft.
second: sq.ft.
detached bldgs: sq.ft.
d. Existing Floor Area first:_ sq.ft.
second: sq.ft.
detached bldgs: sq.ft.
e. Total Floor Area sq.ft.
f. Existing Bldg. Coverage
g. Proposed Bldg. Coverage
h. Paved Impervious Area
Existing:

Proposed:
i. Landscape/Open Space
Existing:

Proposed:

Common:
j. Height of Building(s) Stories Feet
Principal (existing)
(proposed)
Accessory (existing)
(detached) (proposed)
Residential Projects: Existing Proposed Commercial/Industrial Projects: Existing Proposed No. of Off-Street Parking No. of Off-Street Parking
Spaces: Covered Spaces: Standard
Open Compact
Total Handicap
*Usable Open Space per Total
Dwelling: Private
Bicycle (total)
Common covered
uncovered
Total *See Section 24.22.586 for Definition; applicable for two (2) or more units.

2. Signage – List and describe all signs, existing and proposed.

Size of Size of Total
Type of Sign Existing Sign Proposed Sign Sign Area
Wall Wall Area:

Freestanding Frontage of Lot
in Linear Feet:

Roof Lot Frontage:

Projecting Bldg. Frontage
in Linear Feet:
(continued on reverse)

42.42 P:\_Public\Dept Forms\Land Use Application\Forms 2-16\Form 2 Project Design Data.docx

3. Other Project Data -- e.g., construction phasing plan, special design features, or materials, etc.

4. Flood Plain Management (if applicable)
Does your project involve construction of a new structure or an improvement to an existing structure which equals or exceeds 50% of the market value of the structure? Yes No
If yes, a completed Flood Plain Management Questionnaire must be submitted with this application.

42.43 P:\_Public\Dept Forms\Land Use Application\Forms 2-16\Form 4 Use Permit Information.docx

4. Use Permit Information

1. Use Intensity
Capacity: (Number of units, beds, seats, offices, etc.) Hours of Operation: Number of Employees per Shift:

Days per Week: 1st Shift:

Hours per Work Shift: 2nd Shift:
(1st Shift)
3rd Shift:

(2nd Shift) (3rd Shift) Total:

Number of Office or Number of Manufacturing
Executive Employees: Plant Employees:

Other Employees (describe):

Average Number of Vehicles Calling at the Site per Day:

2. Live Entertainment (if applicable)
Number of entertainers, musicians, dancers, etc.:

Description of musical instruments, sound equipment, amplification, etc.:

Size of Area to be used for entertainment (e.g., dance floor and band area)

3. Potential Nuisance Features (if applicable)
Statement as to the nature and extent of noise, smoke, dust, fumes, and other such features generated by the proposed use, and the type of controls proposed:

List any corrosives, gases or chemical agents which will be used at the site, method of storage, handling and disposal:

4. Community and Day-Care Facilities Number Age
(if applicable)
Children and/or Adults Proposed:

Children (19 or under) in family at present:

Adults (over 19) in family at present:

Employees (not live-in):

5. Uses with Alcohol Type of License Requested from ABC Please use additional paper describing use in as much detail as possible if needed.

42.44 P:\_Public\Dept Forms\Land Use Application\Forms 2-16\Form 12 Amendments.docx

12. Amendments
Application is for amendment to:

General Plan/Area Plan Zoning Map Historic Survey
Coastal Land Use Plan Prezoning Historic District
Applications must be accompanied by the following:

General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan Amendments

1. State the amendment designation sought:

2. State the specific reasons for the change in General Plan and/or Coastal Land Use Plan designations:

3. Other pertinent information (please attach).

Zoning Amendments

1. State the Zoning District sought:

2. State the specific reasons for the proposed rezoning:

3. Other pertinent information (please attach).

Prezoning

1. State the Zoning District sought:

2. State the reason for the application to annex land:

3. Has a reorganization of the property involved been applied for with LAFCO? Yes No

4. Attach a copy of the completed LAFCO Project Application (can be obtained from LAFCO Office, 701 Ocean St., Santa Cruz, CA 95060).

Historic Landmark/Districts/Historic Building Survey

1. Description detailing the properties, special aesthetic, cultural, architectural, or engineering interest, value of an historic nature, or relationship to the Historic Preservation Ordinance. (Please attach your explanation.)

2. Sketches, drawings, photographs, or other descriptive material. (Please attach this information.)

3. Special recognition given property--local, state or federal. (Please attach.)

4. Other pertinent information. (Please attach.)

5. The names, addresses and signatures of all owners of real property in the area proposed for amendment.

6. Where applicable, a legal description of the area affected.

7. Two (2) copies of a map (at a minimum scale of 1" = 100') showing:
a. Location of the property under consideration;
a. All parcels of land, any parts of which are within 300 feet of any part of the property under application. b. Existing and proposed streets; and all street, utility, drainage, and other public or private easements within the area.

8. The names, typed on a City-approved mailing matrix, addresses and Assessor's Parcel Numbers (APNs) of all property owners within 300 feet of the area to be rezoned.

42.45 County of Santa Cruz Environmental Health
Division - Preliminary Comments

42.46 Appendix F, Santa Cruz County Local Agency Management Program

10.14.2021
Site Evaluation and Testing Procedures
1 APPENDIX F. SITE EVALUATION AND TESTING PROCEDURES
General

1. Percolation, groundwater and soils profile tests must be performed by those who are licensed within California as a registered civil engineer; a registered Environmental Health Specialist; a soils scientist; an Engineering Geologist; or other Qualified Professional approved by the Health Officer.

2. Results of all testing is to be submitted to Environmental Health (County EH) on the forms provided by the County or on an equivalent form.

3. A scaled site plan showing location of tests (appropriately numbered or designated to correspond to the test data) is to accompany the data.

Soil Profile Evaluation

1. Sites proposed for installation of new Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems (OWTS) must be evaluated for soil conditions by excavating one or more soil profile test-pits with a backhoe or excavator. Soil profile evaluations are required in addition to soil percolation testing to determine the presence of restrictive layers or evidence of seasonal high groundwater conditions at and below the depth of the percolation test holes. The Health Officer may waive the requirement for backhoe test-pits and/or percolation testing for drainfield repairs, upgrades, or replacements where adequate soil information is available.

2. Soil profile excavations must extend at least 10 feet below the bottom of a proposed conventional leaching trench. Shallower excavations may be approved on a case-by-case basis or when an Enhanced Treatment (ET) systems is proposed.

3. Excavations must be made by backhoe or excavator capable of digging to a depth of 14 feet whenever possible. Auger or GeoProbe direct push is allowed only upon a case-bycase determination:
a) when a site is inaccessible by backhoe,
b) when necessary only to verify conditions expected on the basis of prior soils investigations,
c) when done in connection with geologic investigations, or d) for septic repairs or upgrades when an ET system is proposed and it is not required that the soil or groundwater conditions 10’ below the depth of dispersal be evaluated.

4. Observations in the excavation are to be made for soil structure, the potential presence of seasonal groundwater, and the presence of restrictive, low permeability layers. Soils or formations containing continuous channels, cracks, or fractures are to be noted. Gleying, soil mottling, and soil moisture are also to be noted.

42.47 Appendix F, Santa Cruz County Local Agency Management Program

8.2.2021
Site Evaluation and Testing Procedures
2 PERCOLATION TEST PROCEDURE
General Requirements

1. The minimum number of percolation test holes shall be 6 per site. Percolation test holes shall be distributed to provide a reasonable representation of conditions throughout the area proposed for the dispersal system. County EH may elect to witness the installation of the percolation holes, verify presoaking, and/or be present during all or part of the testing. The percolation testing shall be conducted in areas that meet all requirements for a dispersal system (i.e., slope gradients, setbacks, etc.).

2. Two (2) of the six (6) percolation test holes required shall be installed (developed) to depths of at approximately 3 feet (approximately means plus/minus 6 inches) below the proposed dispersal system depth. The remaining four (4) percolation test holes required shall be installed at the proposed depth of dispersal or within the range of the effective soil absorption sidewall (infiltration zone) depths. The resulting percolation rates from the two deeper test holes will be used to demonstrate that the deeper soils are sufficiently permeable (are faster than 120 Minutes Per Inch (MPI)) and whether the underlying soils have rapid perc rates (faster than 1-5 MPI) which may require an ET system. The results from these two test holes (min.) will not be included in the calculation of the overall percolation rate used to determine the required soil application rate for sizing of the proposed dispersal system.

3. All of the percolation test holes should be spaced 10 feet to 50 feet from each other and, no portion of the dispersal system should be proposed greater than 50 feet from the nearest percolation test hole.

4. When required by EH, soils expected to have a percolation rate slower than 60 MPI or having a high shrink-swell potential due to clay content (expansive soils) must be tested during the time period for winter water table observation.

Preparation of Percolation Test Holes

1. Percolation holes shall be prepared by hand auger whenever possible. A power auger may be acceptable on sites if approved in advance by Environmental Health.

2. Test holes are to be 4 to 6 inches in diameter and minimum 12 inches deep.

3. Remove any smeared soil surfaces from the sides of the hole by scraping with a sharp instrument.

4. Remove loose soils from the bottom of the hole and add 2 inches of clean pea gravel.

5. Insert a perforated or slotted 3-4” diameter pipe in the bore hole and carefully pack clean pea gravel in the annular space around the outside of the pipe.

6. Holes must be thoroughly presoaked prior to testing to compensate for any possible soil swelling. Completely refill each test hole with clear water 4 times or provide continuous soaking of the hole with clear water for 4 hours on the day prior or day of the testing.

42.48 Appendix F, Santa Cruz County Local Agency Management Program

8.2.2021
Site Evaluation and Testing Procedures
3 7. Use only clear water and gently pour into the hole to prevent scouring of the sides and bottom.

Performing the Percolation Test

1. Adjust the water depth so that it is 6 inches over the gravel in the bottom of the hole.

2. From a fixed reference point (top of riser pipe), measure the height of the water surface every 30 minutes for a period of at least two (2) hours and until the rate of water level drop stabilizes and three (3) consecutive water level drop measurements are within 10% or 1/8 inch of each other. Refill the test hole to 6 inches over the gravel after every 30- minute reading until a “stabilized” rate has been achieved or a total of 8 readings have been obtained.

3. If, during the course of the testing, the water drains so rapidly that 30-minute readings are not feasible, switch to 10-minute readings. Refill the test hole to 6 inches above the gravel bottom and repeat the water level drop measurement procedures using a 10- minute interval instead of 30 minutes. Continue taking 10-minute readings for at least one hour and until the rate of water level drop stabilizes and three (3) consecutive measurements are within 10% or 1/8-inch of each other or a total of 8 readings are obtained.

4. If, during the course of the testing, the water drains so rapidly that 10-minute readings are not feasible, either: (a) reduce the interval further to 5 minutes or (b) measure the time it takes for the 6” water column to completely drain/percolate into the soil, and report that time as the resultant rate. Continue taking 5-minute readings for at least 30 minutes and until the rate of water level drop stabilizes over three consecutive readings or until a total of 8 readings are obtained.

5. All readings shall be reported in Minutes Per Inch (MPI). The final three readings shall be used to calculate the average “stabilized” rate for each individual percolation test hole.

Note: When there is a pattern of significant variability in percolation rate at the end of the testing period, then additional testing may be required (e.g., extended testing, soil texture analyses, etc.).

Calculation and Interpretation of Percolation Test Results (Not for Seepage Pits)

1. The overall percolation rate to be used as a design basis for determining the sizing requirements of a proposed dispersal system is calculated by taking the sum of the individual stabilized results obtained only from the individual percolation test holes completed within the proposed effective infiltration zone and dividing this sum by the total number of perc test results from holes in this zone (minimum of 3 required). As noted in the previous section, the final three readings shall be averaged to determine the final stabilized rate for each individual test hole. The collection of these final (averaged) rates are then averaged together to calculate the overall rate to be used to size the proposed dispersal system and to determine the applicable groundwater separation requirements for the entire dispersal area tested. The resulting rates from

42.49 Appendix F, Santa Cruz County Local Agency Management Program

8.2.2021
Site Evaluation and Testing Procedures
4 the deeper percolation test holes (approximately 3’ below the proposed dispersal depth) shall not be included in this calculation. The deeper test holes will be used to 1) determine if the deeper soils are sufficiently permeable (are faster than 120 MPI) and 2) determine what type of OWTS will be required.

2. If the overall average percolation rate for the infiltrative zone is slower than 60 MPI, faster than 5 MPI in a nitrate concern area, or faster than 1 MPI outside a nitrate concern area, then the soil may not be suitable for a conventional OWTS. Additional testing in an alternate location or at different dispersal depths (infiltrative zone) may be conducted. Otherwise, an ET system needs to be explored.

3. The requirement for ET due to fast perking soils is a function of the perc rate in both the dispersal area and the underlying material. The definition of fast perking soil is faster than 5 MPI in a nitrate concern area and faster than 1 MPI outside a nitrate concern area.
a. If the overall average percolation rate for the infiltrative zone is fast, the percolation rate of the soils tested at approximately 3’ below the proposed dispersal depth will determine what type of system is required.
i. If none of the individual stabilized percolation rates from the deeper test holes are fast, then ET will not be required due to percolation rates. ii. If any of the individual stabilized percolation rates from the deeper test holes are fast, then ET will be required due to percolation rates. b. If the percolation rates in soils tested at approximately 3’ below the proposed dispersal depth are fast, but the overall average percolation rate obtained from test holes within the depths of the proposed infiltration zone is slower (and faster than 60 MPI), then the requirement for ET will depend on the soil profile/percolation rates between the two depths.

Note: there are factors other than soil percolation rates (such as depth to groundwater or proximity to a stream or water body) that may dictate that an ET system is required regardless of soil percolation rates.

4. Percolation test holes developed in the proposed infiltration zone that result in “failing” rates that are excessively fast or slow (greater than 60 MPI), may be addressed by:
a) Including the failing results(s) in the calculated overall average used to determine the dispersal system soil application rate and thus system sizing (this option is not available for a soil percolation test hole with <1 MPI), or
b) Exclude the area represented by the failing test hole(s), and design and locate the dispersal area according to the resulting average of the other remaining test holes. To determine the area to exclude, split the difference between the failing test hole and nearest passing test hole to determine the radius of the area to be excluded around the failing test hole.

42.50 Appendix F, Santa Cruz County Local Agency Management Program

8.2.2021
Site Evaluation and Testing Procedures
5 Additional percolation testing can be conducted to attempt to reduce the resulting average or to refine the exclusion area represented by the failed test result(s).

5. To complete a site evaluation which includes percolation tests, a report shall be submitted to County EH within one year of the date of the application. The field data for all percolation holes must be submitted. The report shall also include a copy of a scaled site map showing the location of the numbered percolation test holes relative to pertinent site features.

PERCOLATION TESTING FOR SEEPAGE PITS
Construction and Pre-Soak

1. Tests shall be in the primary and expansion area at the lowest elevation, or center if site is flat. If the pit field exceeds 50 feet across, there will be another pit percolation test for each area that is over 50 feet from the primary test area. The health officer shall approve the location and number of the tests.

2. Deep borings by a qualified professional may be used to determine the groundwater potential and soils structural and textural properties if located within 50 feet of the test pit area. The depth of the surface clay cap, common to areas using seepage pits, shall be identified.

3. Depth of the proposed seepage pit shall be determined to provide at least 10 feet of separation to the seasonal high groundwater elevations or impermeable layers. The health officer shall establish this level based upon relevant data provided from other studies, when recorded by a licensed geologist or geotechnical engineer. If the percolation test boring is used to establish groundwater, then the bottom 10 feet above the water must be backfilled and sealed with a bentonite mix.

4. Drilled borings must be a minimum of 4” and shall be constructed to the depth of the proposed pits.

5. After placing 4” of pea gravel in the bottom, insert a saw cut perforated pipe throughout the entire test boring to extend 6” above grade. If the pipe is almost as large as the boring, no gravel is required with enough perforations to allow water contact with all sides. If void space occurs in the annular space, fill with clean flowing coarse sand or pea gravel to prevent collapsing the bore hole.

6. Fill the test pipe with water enough to cover the entire effective flow area on the day prior to the percolation test. Record the depth to water and time of the initial filling. If during the pre-soak, the water level percolates down to half the wetted depth, within a 30-minute period on 2 consecutive attempts, then only a 2-hour pre-soak is required.

7. Recording methods for depths to water may include visual tape methods, float sticks with tape measures, “plunker-tape” soundings, or calibrated electronic devices. Recording methods must be accurate to within 1/8”

42.51 Appendix F, Santa Cruz County Local Agency Management Program

8.2.2021
Site Evaluation and Testing Procedures
6 Method for Measuring Pit Percolation Rates

1. On the day of the test, measure the starting water depth and time prior to filling, resulting in a rate for the beginning and end of the pre-soak. Next, fill the test pipe with water to the proposed water inlet depth.

2. Record the falling head rate of fall at 30-minute intervals for 8 readings (4 hours). If rapid rates are occurring at 10-minute intervals or timed rate per inch intervals may be used for calculating percolation rates. Continue to monitor the rate of fall until a consistent rate is established.

Optional Method for Pits

1. If direct absorption rates are being calculated, refilling methods shall be used to maintain the consistent pressure head of a full pit. Soil Absorption methods will need to gauge total amounts of water added per boring surface area wetted, to establish gallons per square foot. Either method is effective and acceptable.

2. The application rates for the sidewall of the seepage pit shall be based on the Tier 1 Table (State Waterboard OWTS Policy) that provides application rate based upon percolation rates. If direct absorption is calculated by the engineer, then the results may be used to calculate the number and sizing of the pits. The rates of multiple test sites covering the pit field may be averaged in inches per hour, before conversion to an overall MPI.

3. Percolation reports shall be provided to the health officer on forms provided or acceptable for recording the field readings. Test locations and legends shall be indicated on the design plans.

4. Minor deviations can occur with percolation test. Depending on the circumstances, these may be considered by the Health Officer for approval.

GROUNDWATER AND SEASONAL WATER TABLE DETERMINATIONS
Background
The EH Land Use Program implements Santa Cruz County Code (SCCC) Sections 7.38.120.B and

7.38.150.B.9 when making determinations of compliance with regard to groundwater separation requirements for proposed onsite sewage disposal systems, including the use of ET systems with reduced groundwater separation. When required by the Health Officer, observation for seasonal high water table in the area of the proposed sewage disposal system must be made during the period of observation approved by the Health Officer.

Observation periods commence when cumulative rainfall during the rainy season reaches 60% of the seasonal average and is maintained as long as 6" of rainfall has occurred within the prior 30-day period. See the procedures for winter water table testing for more information.

Where is WWT Required?
For parcels lacking adequate data and/or when County EH doesn’t have adequate knowledge or information about the area or when maps, files, or other sources indicate potential

42.52 Appendix F, Santa Cruz County Local Agency Management Program

8.2.2021
Site Evaluation and Testing Procedures
7 seasonal high groundwater and/or prolonged near surface soil saturation, Winter Water Testing (WWT) will be required before County EH may proceed with permit application design review. Applicants or their representative are notified of the WWT requirement and are notified in writing when the WWT test period opens. Applicants may request WWT services as a separate Site Evaluation consultation where no sewage disposal permit application has been submitted. Alternatively, the applicant with a “full Site Evaluation” that may include the WWT services if the hours of service have not been exhausted. For all parcels requiring WWT, applicants must submit the completed Site Evaluation forms and fees according to the requirements outlined below.

Procedures

1. Sewage Disposal Proposals Requiring Winter Water Testing Sewage disposal proposals must include information on verifiable site soil conditions, duration of saturation of near surface soils (upper 4 feet) and groundwater information adequate to confirm that water table separation requirements are satisfied, and specific dispersal system will function properly. Site testing for groundwater will be required unless the system designer demonstrates to the satisfaction of Environmental Health staff that there is already adequate information regarding the location to determine that groundwater separation requirements can be met. The soil saturation depths must be approved by the County EH prior to installation.

2. Site Evaluation with WWT Service Request
a. Early application, planning, site work, and preparation are strongly encouraged. All required site work, soils excavations, soils morphology determinations, groundwater piezometer installations and surface saturation port installations should be completed prior to the official WWT start date unless otherwise approved by EH. Locations for testing shall be identified and approved by County EH staff. b. Install the piezometers and near surface soil saturation ports before preparing and submitting the WWT Monitoring Plan.
c. Submit “Site Evaluation” forms, site plans, WWT Monitoring Plans and fees by Jan 1, as set forth in SCCC Section 7.38.120.B unless otherwise approved by EH. d. WWT evaluations not submitted on time will cause the septic system application approval to be postponed until the subsequent winter testing periods. e. Submit a site plan after WWT testing is completed that clearly indicates the actual location of each piezometer, near surface soil saturation port, and all test-pit excavations.

3. WWT Monitoring Plan
The WWT Monitoring Plan must minimally include the following elements:
a. Detailed site plans with piezometer and near surface soil saturation test port locations and development logs (i.e. diameter or hole and pipe intervals/depths of sand, gravel,

42.53 Appendix F, Santa Cruz County Local Agency Management Program

8.2.2021
Site Evaluation and Testing Procedures
8 bentonite, slotted pipe, etc.)
b. Proposed frequency and duration of monitoring
c. Description of observed test-hole soils profile characteristics:

Note: Soils morphology determinations must be performed by a Qualified Professional formally trained in soils science.
d. Description of near surface soil saturation duration testing methodologies

4. Piezometer Design
a. Piezometers must be installed and constructed in accordance with the above work plan; also see Figure 1 (attached sheet).
b. Piezometers must be constructed with 2” minimum to 4” maximum Schedule 40 PVC, ABS or NDS leach pipe (non-perforated) piping and shall be equipped with threaded end-caps or snugly fitted end-plugs that can be removed by hand. c. Each piezometer shall be equipped with a minimum functional 1” wide x 12” deep (minimum) annular seal composed of bentonite, concrete or cement grout to prevent infiltration of surface and near surface water from channeling down the annular space of the borehole. Deeper annular seals may be necessary for accurate groundwater level measurements, based on soil conditions.
d. Piezometer casings must extend at least 6 inches above grade and must be slotted at the desired depth below the 12” minimum surface seal depth. e. Clean gravel or approved sand must be placed to fill the annular space below the seal or as designed in County EH approved WWT Monitoring Plan.
f. Piezometers shall be labeled with permanent ink for identification purposes. A permanent reference mark, from which all water table measures are to be taken, must also be provided along the top edge of each piezometer riser.
g. At the end of the official WWT monitoring period each piezometer will be deconstructed and the remaining bore holes backfilled with clean native material.

5. Piezometer Siting & Installation
a. A minimum of 3 piezometers shall be installed across the area proposed for wastewater dispersal (this means a total of 3 piezometers needed for both the primary and expansion dispersal areas if located in close proximity). The siting must be approved by County EH prior to installation.
b. Additional piezometers may be required by County EH to obtain more accurate or comprehensive groundwater data.
c. An additional array of 3 WWT piezometers may be required if 100% leach field expansion area is not in close proximity.

42.54 Appendix F, Santa Cruz County Local Agency Management Program

8.2.2021
Site Evaluation and Testing Procedures
9 d. One piezometer will be installed near each end of the proposed dispersal area (including top and bottom portions of sloped dispersal areas); a third piezometer shall be installed centrally within the designated dispersal area. The depth of the piezometer screen or slots shall be greater than: {proposed total trench depth} +2 feet + {groundwater separation requirement set forth in SCCC 7.38.150.B.9: 5’ or 8’, depending on perc rate and distance to a water body} or {proposed total trench depth} + 2’, 3’, or 5’ if ET is specified. Ex. 2.5’ proposed flow w/ 1.5’ cover soil, therefore a 4’ total trench depth +8’ (if well is +250’ feet away from septic system and soil is medium perc, 6-30 MPI) = 14 feet piezometer depth.
e. Additional piezometers will be required for depths above each restricting layer, if any are identified, as determined by soils morphology and County EH site observations. f. WWT for ET and mound systems, where the standard separations are not possible, and groundwater is high must be discussed with County EH staff prior to finalizing of the WWT Monitoring Plan.

6. Near Surface Soil Saturation Testing.
a. In addition to testing for water table depth, additional data shall be obtained to verify that near surface soil saturation will not adversely affect function of the proposed dispersal system. Existing percolation test ports or new test ports can be used for near surface soil saturation duration determination. Existing perc test data and/or new test data may be used for near surface soil saturation testing as long as testing is extended over a time frame that verifies that water either moves through upper soils relatively rapidly (i.e. percolates faster than 30 minutes per inch) and/or does not remain perched over tight soils, in critical dispersal zones, for an extended period of time. Unless County EH determines that adequate information exists, the following testing for saturation will be required. A minimum of 3 near surface soil saturation ports shall be installed across the area proposed for wastewater dispersal (this means a total of 3 ports needed for both the primary and expansion dispersal areas if located in close proximity). Additional ports may be required by County EH to obtain more accurate or comprehensive surface saturation data.
b. An additional 3 WWT near surface soil saturation ports may be required if 100% leach field expansion area is not in close proximity. One near surface soil saturation port will be installed near each end of the proposed dispersal area (including top and bottom portions of sloped dispersal areas) a third port shall be installed centrally within the designated dispersal area. The depth of the ports shall be equal to the proposed total trench depth.

Additional ports may be required, as determined by soils morphology and County EH site observations

7. Qualified Professionals Requirement for WWT
WWT data collection, analysis of results, and final reporting must be performed by an independent and currently licensed Qualified Professional (QP); including Registered

42.55 Appendix F, Santa Cruz County Local Agency Management Program

8.2.2021
Site Evaluation and Testing Procedures
10 Environmental Health Specialists, Soil Scientists, Geotechnical Engineers, Registered Professional Geologists, Soils Engineers (“Soil Engineer” means a state of California Registered Civil Engineer whose field of expertise is soil mechanics), and Registered Civil Engineers. All the above Qualified Professionals must have specialized training/education in present day descriptions and interpretations of soils morphology.

8. Data Analysis & Interpretation
a. The Qualified Professional shall present a WWT Final Report to County EH on behalf of the applicant wherein all required WWT information outlined above is compiled and results interpreted. The QP shall submit a professional opinion regarding the subject parcel’s suitability for sewage disposal and present system design criteria based on site evaluation and WWT findings.
b. The qualified Professional must report WWT findings to County EH within 90 days after the WWT period terminates, regardless of the final outcome of the study. c. Extremely heavy rainfall with high GW readings and near surface soil saturation which appear to be short- lived or brief inundation events should be recorded and reassessed 1- 3 days after heavy rains, as set forth in SCCC Section 7.38.120.B. The highest persistent readings will be used as the acknowledged measured depth to seasonal high groundwater and/or near surface soil saturation for disposal system design and permitting purposes. d. County EH staff must be scheduled to observe at least one set of piezometer readings and two sets of near surface soil saturation readings (initial reading taken shortly after significant rain and the other showing the time length of near surface soil saturation duration) with the QP present during the WWT testing period.

42.56 Appendix F, Santa Cruz County Local Agency Management Program

8.2.2021
Site Evaluation and Testing Procedures
11 42.57

42.58 From: Noah Downing
To: Noah Downing
Subject: FW: Pogonip Lower Meadow Remediation Costs
Date: Monday, June 13, 2022 3:35:37 PM
From: Darrie Ganzhorn [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, February 18, 2022 1:35 PM
To: Tony Elliot <[email protected]>
Subject: Fwd: Pogonip Lower Meadow Remediation Costs
HI Tony,
I think the letter you requested has already been sent to the council. I'm forwarding it here.

Please note the passage in the third paragraph,
As the Homeless Garden Project strives to identify the most pragmatic and direct path to our permanent home, the Upper Meadow process should not begin until information about cost and timeline for remediation of the lower meadow can be evaluated.

Let me know if you need additional information.

All the best,
Darrie
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Caroline Maser <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, Feb 9, 2022 at 12:59 PM
Subject: Pogonip Lower Meadow Remediation Costs
To: <[email protected]>
Cc: Darrie Ganzhorn <[email protected]>, <[email protected]> Dear Mayor Brunner and City Council Members,
I am writing to follow up on the Council’s actions at the August 24 and September 28, 2021 City Council meetings, with regard to Homeless Garden Project’s request to initiate an amendment to the Pogonip Master plan. The council directed staff to initiate the amendment process expeditiously and to prepare an evaluation of the cost and timeline for remediating contamination in the lower meadow.

We are informed that the timeline and cost for remediation of the lower meadow will not be available until an undefined date in Spring, 2022. The information regarding the lower meadow that was previously requested by the council would allow the Homeless Garden Project to more fully evaluate any possibility for our organization to proceed with its previously approved project on the lower meadow. Given community input on this subject, including from the Santa Cruz Sentinel editorial board, we would ask that this information be provided to us and the community within the next 30 days.

We urge the Parks and Recreation Department to provide this information without delay as it will shed light on the Upper Meadow process. As the Homeless Garden Project strives to identify the most pragmatic and direct path to our permanent home, the Upper Meadow process should not begin until information about cost and timeline for remediation of the lower meadow can be evaluated.

Thank you for your continued support and attention to this request.

42.59 Sincerely,
Carrie Maser
--
Darrie Ganzhorn
[email protected]
Executive Director
Homeless Garden Project
PO Box 617
Santa Cruz, CA 95061
office: 831.426.3609.12
cell: 831.713.9355
In the soil of our urban farm and garden, people find the tools they need to build a home in the world. http://www.shop.homelessgardenproject.org/
http://www.homelessgardenproject.org
https://www.facebook.com/HomelessGardenProject

42.60 REVISED ADDITIONAL SOIL INVESTIGATION REPORT

AND HUMAN HEALTH SCREENING EVALUATION

Lower Main Meadow, Pogonip Open Space
501 Golf Club Drive
Santa Cruz, California
01-POG-002
Prepared For:

City of Santa Cruz
Parks and Recreations Department
323 Church Street
Santa Cruz, California 95060
Prepared By:
1371 Oakland Boulevard, Suite 200
Walnut Creek, California 94596
February 17, 2022
Doug Whichard
Project Scientist
Donald W. Moore, P.G.

Principal Geologist
Ivy Inouye
Principal Toxicologist

42.61 Revised Additional Soil Investigation Report and Human Health Screening Evaluation Lower Main Meadow, Pogonip Open Space, Santa Cruz, California February 17, 2022 i RMD ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS, INC.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................................ iii LIST OF TABLES .......................................................................................................................... iii LIST OF APPENDICES ................................................................................................................. iii

1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................1-1

1.1 Project Objective.....................................................................................1-2

1.2 Scope of Work .........................................................................................1-2

2.0 SITE BACKGROUND..........................................................................................2-1

2.1 Site Location and Description .................................................................2-1

2.2 Historical Land Use ..................................................................................2-1

2.3 Current Land Use.....................................................................................2-2

2.4 Anticipated Land Use ..............................................................................2-2

2.5 Geological and Hydrogeological Setting................................................2-3

2.6 Conceptual Shooting Range Contaminant Distribution ..........................2-3

2.7 Previous Site Investigations .....................................................................2-3

2.7.1 2018/2019 Soil Investigation ........................................................2-5

2.7.2 February 2019 Soil Investigation ..................................................2-6

2.7.3 May 2020 Soil Investigation..........................................................2-7

2.7.4 December 2020 Site Visit .............................................................2-7

2.7.5 March 2021 Soil Investigation.......................................................2-8

2.7.6 Summary of COPCs ......................................................................2-8

2.7.6.1 Metals ...........................................................................2-9

2.7.6.2 Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons ...............................2-9

3.0 HUMAN HEALTH CONCEPTUAL SITE MODEL.................................................3-1

3.1 Chemical Source, Release, and Transport...............................................3-1

3.2 Potential Receptors .................................................................................3-2

3.2.1 Hypothetical On-Site Unrestricted Receptor ................................3-2

3.2.2 Hypothetical On-Site Commercial Worker Receptor....................3-3

3.2.3 Hypothetical On-Site Recreational Trail User Receptor................3-3

3.2.4 Hypothetical On-Site Unauthorized Camper Receptor ................3-3

3.3 Complete Exposure Pathways .................................................................3-4

42.62 Revised Additional Soil Investigation Report and Human Health Screening Evaluation Lower Main Meadow, Pogonip Open Space, Santa Cruz, California February 17, 2022 ii RMD ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS, INC.

4.0 SCOPE OF WORK..............................................................................................4-1

4.1 Pre-field Activities....................................................................................4-1

4.1.1 Site Health and Safety Plan...........................................................4-1

4.1.2 Site Reconnaissance .....................................................................4-1

4.1.3 Borehole Clearance ......................................................................4-1

4.2 Soil Screening and Sampling Locations and Depths...............................4-1

4.3 Soil Logging, Screening, Sampling, and Laboratory Analysis .................4-3

4.3.1 Soil Logging..................................................................................4-3

4.3.2 Soil Screening ...............................................................................4-3

4.3.3 Soil Sample Selection ...................................................................4-4

4.3.4 Soil Sampling Procedures .............................................................4-4

4.3.5 Soil Analyses .................................................................................4-4

4.4 Borehole Completion ..............................................................................4-5

4.5 Decontamination Procedures ..................................................................4-5

4.6 Investigation-Derived Waste Handling....................................................4-5

4.7 Field Variances.........................................................................................4-5

5.0 HUMAN HEALTH SCREENING EVALUATION OF LEAD ANALYTICAL RESULTS.............................................................................................................5-1

5.1 Analytical Summary .................................................................................5-2

5.2 Findings ...................................................................................................5-3

6.0 CONCLUSIONS..................................................................................................6-1

7.0 LIMITATIONS .....................................................................................................7-1

8.0 REFERENCES .....................................................................................................8-1

42.63 Revised Additional Soil Investigation Report and Human Health Screening Evaluation Lower Main Meadow, Pogonip Open Space, Santa Cruz, California February 17, 2022 iii RMD ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS, INC.

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 Site Location Map
Figure 2 Site Plan
Figure 3 Lead Concentrations Exceeding Screening Level for Recreational Trail User Figure 4 Areas Exceeding Screening Levels for Recreational Trail Use Figure 5 Human Health Conceptual Site Model
Figure 6 Areas Exceeding Screening Levels for Unrestricted Land Use

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 Lead Concentrations in Soil
Table 2 Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon Concentrations in Soil

LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A Excerpts From Previous Reports
Appendix B Soil Screening Levels for Hypothetical Recreational Trail User Receptor and Hypothetical Unauthorized Camper Receptor
Appendix C Field Datasheets
Appendix D XRF Data
Appendix E Laboratory Analytical Reports
Appendix F Lead Model Spreadsheets

42.64 Revised Additional Soil Investigation Report and Human Health Screening Evaluation Lower Main Meadow, Pogonip Open Space, Santa Cruz, California February 17, 2022 RMD ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS, INC. 1-1

1.0 INTRODUCTION
RMD Environmental Solutions, Inc. (RMD), on behalf of the City of Santa Cruz (the City), has prepared this Revised Additional Soil Investigation Report and Human Health Screening Evaluation (Report) for the Lower Main Meadow, Pogonip Open Space, located at 501 Golf Club Drive1 in Santa Cruz, California (the Site, Figures 1 and 2). The investigation activities documented in this Report were conducted in accordance with the Revised Delineation of Lead-Impacted Soil Work Plan, dated May 26, 2021 (Work Plan; RMD, 2021a) and the County of Santa Cruz (the County) approval letter, dated June 2, 2021. This Report was prepared in response to the County’s letter dated December 15, 2021, which requested a revised report to address comments to the Additional Soil Investigation Report and Human Health Screening Evaluation (Report) dated October 15, 2021 (RMD, 2021b).

The Site is located in the Pogonip Open Space Preserve. The City leased approximately

9.5 acres in the lower meadow area of the preserve to the Homeless Garden Project (HGP), a non-profit organization, for conversion from recreational and natural open space to an agricultural and educational farm. In 2019, the City learned that a portion of the Site had been used as a skeet and trap shooting range between the 1930s and 1950s. Metals, primarily lead and to a lesser extent antimony, arsenic, copper, and zinc, are associated with shot, and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) are associated with clay targets. In 2019, a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (Phase I; Weber, Hayes & Associates [WHA], 2019) identified the following two recognized environmental conditions (RECs):
• The historic operation of a skeet shooting range with confirmed elevated lead and PAH concentrations in shallow soil samples; and
• The presence of trash and debris primarily observed within the ravine of the lower meadow where homeless encampments have been established.

Based on the proposed land use by HGP, these RECs were investigated and the results were reported in the Preliminary Endangerment Assessment Report (PEA Report; RMD, 2020b). Based on the findings of the PEA Report, PAHs and select metals, primarily lead, were identified in HGP’s proposed planting areas of the Site. PAHs have been adequately delineated at the Site. 1 Note, the Site address changed from 333 Golf Club Drive to 501 Golf Club Drive in 2021.

42.65 Revised Additional Soil Investigation Report and Human Health Screening Evaluation Lower Main Meadow, Pogonip Open Space, Santa Cruz, California February 17, 2022 RMD ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS, INC. 1-2

1.1 Project Objective
The objective of this investigation was to delineate the horizontal and vertical extent of lead in shallow soil associated with the historic shooting range in areas not previously investigated at the Site.

1.2 Scope of Work
To meet this objective, the delineation investigation included the following scope of work:
• Field screening of surface and shallow soil samples for the presence of lead shot. • Collection and laboratory analysis of soil samples for lead. • Assess laboratory analytical results to determine the nature, concentration, and extent of lead at the surface and in shallow soil at the Site.
• Compare soil sample analytical results to human health and environmental screening levels presented in the Work Plan (RMD, 2021a).

This Report documents completion of the above-mentioned activities and considers results of this investigation to evaluate the nature and extent of lead and whether any corrective actions are warranted relative to the existing and proposed land-uses. Additionally, the Report includes an updated screening level evaluation for PAHs using data from the May 2020 investigation and development of screening levels for the hypothetical unauthorized camper receptor.

42.66 Revised Additional Soil Investigation Report and Human Health Screening Evaluation Lower Main Meadow, Pogonip Open Space, Santa Cruz, California February 17, 2022 RMD ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS, INC. 2-1

2.0 SITE BACKGROUND

2.1 Site Location and Description
The Site is identified as the Lower Main Meadow of the Pogonip Open Space Preserve in Santa Cruz, California (Figure 1). The Site is the southern portion of the larger Santa Cruz County Assessor’s Parcel Number [APN] 001-211-01 (Figure 2), with the Site entrance located at

36.990364°N, 122.036831°W. The Site is currently undeveloped except for a series of dirt roads and hiking trails accessible from Golf Club Drive, which is located along the southern and western Site boundaries (Figure 2). The Site is divided into the east meadow, the west meadow, a ravine between the east and west meadows, the north orchard, and the Emma McCrary Trail Area (Figure 2). A 0.08-acre seasonal wetland has been identified in the northern portion of west meadow. The Site is bordered by additional open space and the Pogonip clubhouse to the northwest, additional open space and a former horse stable to the southwest, a forested slope to the east with a railroad line, Highway 9 and the San Lorenzo River beyond, and a plant nursery and Santa Cruz METRO office buildings to the south with commercial businesses beyond.

The California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) was the lead oversight agency during the PEA investigation described in the PEA Report. The County is the current lead oversight agency for the delineation activities described in this Report.

A record of environmental conditions at the Site (i.e., regulatory directives and correspondence, Site documents, and analytical data) may be obtained through a review of the case files for DTSC EnviroStor Database Number 60002874 at the following website:
https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/profile_report?global_id=60002874 (Site Code 202272).

2.2 Historical Land Use
The following summarizes the historical land use based on information presented in the Phase I:
• Beginning in approximately 1850, the area surrounding the Site was used for limestone mining and the production of lime;
• From approximately 1912 through 1986, the Site was part of a social club that included:
o In 1912, the Site and surrounding open space were developed into a golf course and social club. The Pogonip clubhouse is located northeast of the Site; o In 1935, the golf course was turned into polo fields with horse stables located immediately off-Site to the west;

42.67 Revised Additional Soil Investigation Report and Human Health Screening Evaluation Lower Main Meadow, Pogonip Open Space, Santa Cruz, California February 17, 2022 RMD ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS, INC. 2-2
o In 1937, the polo club constructed a skeet shooting range in the west meadow between Golf Club Drive and the ravine;
o In 1948, a shooting range with a “Remington electrical trap” was added adjacent to the existing skeet shooting range, and the grounds were leveled by grading; o A 1956 aerial photograph of the Site shows the shooting range infrastructure removed and the area opened to rangeland;
o From approximately 1958 to 1967, the Site was used for cattle grazing; and o In 1987, the Pogonip clubhouse was posted as unsafe for occupancy.

2.3 Current Land Use
In 1989, the Site was acquired by the City and has since been maintained as recreational open space. A fire break is maintained along the eastern boundary of the Site. During Phase I activities, Site inspection observations included concrete shooting pads and clay target fragments in the west meadow. In addition, the presence of unauthorized camping and some trash and debris, including shopping carts and hypodermic needles, were observed largely in the ravine area. City staff perform homeless encampment clean-ups; fire prevention work, such as removing vegetation and clearing dead trees; and trail work along the existing trails.

2.4 Anticipated Land Use
Based on results of the PEA Report, the HGP may develop portions of the west meadow, east meadow, and north orchard classified as unrestricted land use into active farming land. The HGP has considered plans to fence off the unrestricted portions of the Site to delineate their planting areas. An Operation and Maintenance Plan and Development Plans for the Pogonip Farm and Garden propose a building complex, consisting of an administrative building, a pole barn, two greenhouses, and parking in the northeast portion of the west meadow along Golf Club Drive (HGP, 2017). In areas of the Site classified as restricted land use, the City has posted signs notifying the public of known shallow soil contamination in the area. In July 2021, HGP sent a letter to the Mayor and City Councilmembers requesting to relocate the site of the planned Pogonip Farm and Garden from the Lower Main Meadow to the Upper Main Meadow. The Upper Main Meadow is located near the Pogonip clubhouse, an area outside the hypothetical range of lead shot and clay targets that is not expected to be impacted by the former skeet and trap shooting use. The City is currently evaluating the possibility of relocating the farm to this recently proposed location. In unfarmed areas, the Site is and would continue to be used for outdoor

42.68 Revised Additional Soil Investigation Report and Human Health Screening Evaluation Lower Main Meadow, Pogonip Open Space, Santa Cruz, California February 17, 2022 RMD ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS, INC. 2-3
recreation (hiking and biking trails), natural resource and trail management, and homeless encampment clean-up activities.

2.5 Geological and Hydrogeological Setting
As described in the Phase I, grassland terraces are composed of fine-grained unconsolidated terrace deposits that overlie bedrock sandstones of the Santa Margarita Formation. Perched shallow groundwater supports seasonal wetlands and seeps. A 345-foot deep water supply well near the Pogonip clubhouse reported a depth to water of 128 feet below ground surface (bgs) in 1993. Previous investigations indicate shallow soil at the Site consist mainly of sandy silts with fine-grained sand to depths of 2 feet bgs.

2.6 Conceptual Shooting Range Contaminant Distribution
The types and distribution of contaminants associated with shooting ranges typically display a systematic pattern (Interstate Technology & Regulatory Council [ITRC], 2005). In general, metals, primarily lead and to a lesser extent antimony, arsenic, copper and zinc, are associated with shot, and PAHs are associated with clay targets. These materials are expected to be deposited on the surface or near surface.

Trap and skeet shooting ranges feature a fan-shaped clay target and shot fall zone radiating from the shooting pads. Although the distribution may vary, the following general dimensions relative to the shooting pads are hypothetically expected:
• 0 to 100 feet – Spent cartridge cases and wads;
• 200 to 325 feet – Clay target fragments; and
• 200 to 700 feet (skeet)/770 feet (trap) – Shot fall zone, with the greatest anticipated shot density at 400 to 600 feet.

This conceptual distribution of contaminants was generally observed during the PEA investigation conducted in May 2020 (Section 2.7.3).

2.7 Previous Site Investigations
Between November 2018 and March 2021, soil samples were collected. Consistent with the anticipated land use and the PEA Report, the following soil screening levels (SLs) were compared with Site investigation results:
• Background Concentrations for Metals – DTSC (2015) recommends that metals detected at background (ambient) levels not be identified as chemicals of potential concern

42.69 Revised Additional Soil Investigation Report and Human Health Screening Evaluation Lower Main Meadow, Pogonip Open Space, Santa Cruz, California February 17, 2022 RMD ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS, INC. 2-4
(COPCs) at a site. In accordance with the DTSC-approved Preliminary Endangerment Assessment Work Plan (RMD, 2020a), a 2009 Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL) study was used to identify acceptable background levels for metals except for arsenic, which used the background level for San Francisco Bay Region of 11 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg, Duvergé, 2011). Table 1 of the PEA Report presents background levels for metals detected in soil.
• Risk-Based SLs – The risk-based soil SLs include U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Regional Screening Levels (RSLs; USEPA, 2021) modified per DTSC Office of Human and Ecological Risk Human Health Risk Assessment (HHRA) Note Number 3 (HHRA Note 3; DTSC, 2020) in accordance with the PEA Manual (DTSC, 2015). The risk-based soil SLs were available for unrestricted residential and commercial/industrial receptors. Risk-based soil SLs for lead were developed separately, as described in the following bullet.
• Lead SLs – Unlike other COPCs, the soil SL for lead is based on blood-lead models.

Neither USEPA nor California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) publishes toxicity values for lead. In the absence of toxicity values, noncarcinogenic effects from exposure to lead are evaluated by predicting blood lead concentrations using toxicokinetic modeling. This section describes the blood-lead models used to develop lead soil SLs for the hypothetical long-term receptors anticipated at the Site. o Future On-Site Unrestricted Receptor - This receptor is a long-term receptor that includes unrestricted land use, which may include farming and gardening activities for the purpose of cultivating, consuming and/or selling produce. DTSC LeadSpread 82 is recommended by DTSC for evaluating lead exposure under unrestricted land use. This model is based on child exposures only and an exposure frequency of seven days per week. Based on this model, DTSC’s soil SL for lead is 80 mg/kg (DTSC, 2020). The soil SL of 80 mg/kg represents a reasonably conservative soil SL to protect future on-Site unrestricted receptors (RMD, 2020b).
o Future On-Site Commercial Worker Receptor - This receptor is a long-term adult receptor, a full-time employee that is assumed to spend 250 days per year 2 The DTSC LeadSpread 8 model (DTSC, 2011) calculates several blood lead concentrations, including the median, 90th, 95th, 98th, and 99th percentile estimates for the predicted distribution. Additionally, the model calculates the concentration in exterior soil and interior dust that will result in a 90th percentile estimate of blood lead equal to the target increase in children’s blood lead level of concern by 1 microgram per deciliter (µg/dL; CalEPA benchmark incremental change criterion for lead).

42.70 Revised Additional Soil Investigation Report and Human Health Screening Evaluation Lower Main Meadow, Pogonip Open Space, Santa Cruz, California February 17, 2022 RMD ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS, INC. 2-5
working at the Site for 25 years. This receptor may spend the workday (8 hours per day) both indoors performing light office duties and outdoors performing moderate soil invasive activities in surface or near surface soil (e.g., maintenance or landscaping). For commercial worker exposure scenarios, DTSC recommends a modified version of USEPA's June 21, 2009 adult lead model (ALM; DTSC, 2011)3. Based on this model, DTSC’s commercial soil SL for lead is 320 mg/kg (DTSC, 2020; RMD, 2020b).
o Current/Future Recreational Trail User Receptor – This receptor is a long-term receptor that includes receptors using the Site for outdoor recreation (hiking and biking trails). This receptor is anticipated to be primarily an adult receptor; however, a child receptor may occasionally visit the Site during organized field trips or other visits accompanied by an adult. For this reason, the LeadSpread 8 model based on child exposures was used to estimate a soil SL for on-Site recreational trail user receptors. In the LeadSpread 8 model, DTSC indicates that non-residential scenarios may involve fewer than seven days per week for exposure frequency. Based on best professional judgement, to evaluate a recreational trail user scenario, the exposure frequency in the model was reduced from seven days per week to one day per week. The resulting soil SL for lead of 540 mg/kg represents a reasonably conservative soil SL to protect current/future on-Site recreational trail user receptors (RMD, 2020b) 4 .

The SLs for soil are shown on Tables 1 and 2. Unless otherwise specified, the results of the previous Site investigation activities are compared with the soil SLs and discussed below.

2.7.1 2018/2019 Soil Investigation
The HGP conducted agricultural soil testing and incorporated evaluation of the potential agricultural impacts of the lead associated with the historic shooting range (HGP, 2019). This evaluation indicated the following:
• Extractable lead concentrations ranging from 0.9 parts per million (ppm) to 89.8 ppm, which exceeded a laboratory-recommended threshold for safe agricultural use of 22 ppm; and
3 The model calculates the concentration in exterior soil and interior dust that will result in a 90th percentile estimate of blood lead among fetuses of adult workers of 1 µg/dL. 4 The soil SL for lead of 540 mg/kg for on-Site recreational trail user receptors was included in the Work Plan (RMD, 2021) and subsequently approved by the County in their approval letter, dated June 2, 2021.

42.71 Revised Additional Soil Investigation Report and Human Health Screening Evaluation Lower Main Meadow, Pogonip Open Space, Santa Cruz, California February 17, 2022 RMD ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS, INC. 2-6
• Total sorbed lead concentrations ranging from 56.08 mg/kg to 145.86 mg/kg, which were below a threshold of 400 mg/kg that would require implementation of modified farming practices (HGP, 2019).

Based on these results, the City decided to conduct additional sampling at the Site.

2.7.2 February 2019 Soil Investigation
Soil samples were collected from 52 soil borings, each advanced to approximately 2 feet bgs, in the west meadow at the Site (Environmental Investigation Services, Inc., 2019). Twelve 4-part composite samples (B1 through B12) were collected from 48 borings at depths of approximately 0 to 0.5 foot bgs (surface) and 1.5 to 2 feet bgs (shallow). Additionally, one 4-part composite sample (B13) was collected from approximately 0 to 0.5 foot bgs. The surface composite samples were analyzed for select metals (total lead, arsenic, copper, and zinc), PAHs, and total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) as diesel and motor oil (with silica gel cleanup). The 1.5 to 2 feet bgs composite samples were analyzed for metals only. The 4-part composite sample results for surface soil at borings B1 (northwestern portion of the west meadow) and B3 (northern portion of the west meadow) reported lead concentrations exceeding the residential screening level of 80 mg/kg. Therefore, the four individual samples for these locations were analyzed for lead and reported lead concentrations exceeding the residential (unrestricted) screening level of 80 mg/kg. Samples with PAH concentrations exceeding screening levels were limited to surface soil in borings B5 and B7 (eastern portion of the west meadow) and borings B6 and B11 (central portion of the west meadow, near a former shooting pad location). Data summary tables for this investigation are provided as Tables A1 and A2 of Appendix A.

Based on the findings of the 2019 investigation, the following data gaps were identified:
• The magnitude of select metals (lead, antimony, arsenic, copper, zinc) concentrations in unsampled areas within the planned planting footprint in the west meadow; • The extent and magnitude of select metals (lead, antimony, arsenic, copper, zinc) concentrations within the planned planting footprint in the north orchard and east meadow where higher shot fall density is anticipated;
• The extent and magnitude of PAH concentrations within the planned planting footprint in the western portion of the north orchard and east meadow; and • The vertical extent of PAH concentrations that exceed screening levels in the west meadow and other areas.

42.72 Revised Additional Soil Investigation Report and Human Health Screening Evaluation Lower Main Meadow, Pogonip Open Space, Santa Cruz, California February 17, 2022 RMD ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS, INC. 2-7

2.7.3 May 2020 Soil Investigation
To address the data gaps identified during the 2019 investigation, soil samples were collected from 71 soil borings located across the Site, each advanced to approximately 2 feet bgs (RMD, 2020b). Twenty-six soil borings were located in the west meadow, 12 soil borings were located in the north orchard, and 33 soil borings were located in the east meadow. Soil sample locations were selected based on the planned farm and garden areas at the Site, findings of the 2019 soil investigation, and hypothetical shot and clay target fragment fall zones. During boring advancement, soil at approximate 6-inch intervals (0-0.5 foot bgs, 0.5-1.0 foot bgs, and

1.0-1.5 foot bgs [collectively referred to as the “surface”], and 1.5-2.0 foot bgs [shallow]) was visually inspected and logged. Soil from each boring location was screened with a X-Ray Fluorescence (XRF) analyzer to evaluate the vertical distribution of lead in the field. Two soil samples were collected from each boring location based on field observations. The selected soil samples were analyzed for select metals (lead, antimony, arsenic, copper, and zinc) and PAHs according to field observations and XRF screening (for lead) as described in the PEA Report.

Data summary tables for this investigation are provided as Tables A3 and A4 of Appendix A.

Lead concentrations exceeded the commercial worker soil SL of 320 mg/kg and the recreational trail user soil SL of 540 mg/kg at one location south of the southern shooting range in the west meadow, in the western portion of the north orchard along the trail connecting the west meadow to the east meadow, and in the south and west portions of the east meadow along the ravine.

PAH concentrations exceeded one or more soil SLs at eight boring locations in the west meadow.

As mentioned above, the extent of PAHs in soil have been delineated to the extent necessary.

Based on the findings of the 2020 investigation, the following data gaps were identified:
• The extent of lead concentrations near the north orchard along the trail connecting the west meadow to the east meadow;
• The extent of lead concentrations within the sloped ravine area between the west meadow and east meadow; and
• The extent of lead concentrations along the recreational trails located south of the east meadow (Emma McCrary Trail Area).

2.7.4 December 2020 Site Visit
On December 15, 2020, RMD, City, and County personnel conducted a Site visit to review previous sampling locations where lead concentrations exceeded the recreational trail user soil SL, discuss potential delineation sampling locations, and evaluate potential access issues.

42.73 Revised Additional Soil Investigation Report and Human Health Screening Evaluation Lower Main Meadow, Pogonip Open Space, Santa Cruz, California February 17, 2022 RMD ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS, INC. 2-8
The findings of the Site visit included:
• Two arcs of concrete pads, which are interpreted as the shooting pads for the historic trap and skeet ranges, were further observed in the central portion of the west meadow; • Vegetation covers most of the Site with homeless encampments further observed in several wooded areas including the ravine area; and
• The southern side of the east meadow, the ravine area, and public recreation trails in the southeastern portion of the Site and connecting the west meadow to the east meadow had not been adequately delineated for lead concentrations in shallow soil.

The hypothetical fan-shaped clay target and shot fall distribution associated with the orientation of the shooting pads is depicted on Figure 2. These features are augmented with the prior and proposed soil sampling locations on Figure 3.

Based on previous investigations and the Site visit, the County determined that further investigation is needed to fully delineate the lateral and vertical extent of lead concentrations in shallow soil near the southern side of the east meadow, in accessible portions of the ravine, and along select public recreation trails in the southeastern portion of the Site.

2.7.5 March 2021 Soil Investigation
Based on findings of the PEA Report, WHA collected shallow soil samples from 12 soil borings located along the trail connecting the west meadow to the east meadow near the north orchard to delineate the extent of lead concentrations near boring NO-3 and to support the use of this trail (WHA, 2021). At each boring, soil samples were collected at the surface and at approximately 1.5 feet bgs and analyzed for lead. The reported lead concentrations of up to 208 mg/kg were below the commercial soil SL of 320 mg/kg and the recreational trail user soil SL of 540 mg/kg. Based on these results, additional soil investigation is no longer necessary in this portion of the Site. A data summary table for this investigation is provided as Table A5 of Appendix A.

2.7.6 Summary of COPCs
Based on the sample-by-sample comparison with background levels and risk-based soil SLs for the PEA investigation (RMD, 2020b), the following metals and PAHs were identified as COPCs in each area:

42.74 Revised Additional Soil Investigation Report and Human Health Screening Evaluation Lower Main Meadow, Pogonip Open Space, Santa Cruz, California February 17, 2022 RMD ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS, INC. 2-9
Summary of Chemicals of Potential Concern (COPCs)
Area Unrestricted Land Use Commercial Land Use
West Meadow • Antimony
• Arsenic
• Copper
• Lead
• Zinc
• Benz(a)anthracene
• Benzo(a)pyrene
• Benzo(b)fluoranthene
• Dibenz(a,h)anthracene
• Indeno(1,2,3-c,d)pyrene
• Naphthalene
• Benzo(a)pyrene
• Lead
• Benzo(b)fluoranthene
• Dibenz(a,h)anthracene
North Orchard • Lead • Lead
East Meadow • Lead • Lead
Based on the findings of the PEA Report, PAHs and select metals, primarily lead, were identified in proposed planting areas of the Site, as described in the following sections.

2.7.6.1 Metals
A total of 103 samples were analyzed for metals, including 76 surface samples and 27 shallow samples. Based on comparison of detected concentrations with background levels and unrestricted and/or commercial soil SLs, select metals were identified as COPCs at the Site.

Antimony, arsenic, copper, and zinc were only detected at concentrations above unrestricted soil SLs in soil sample WM-DG-13-1.5' in the west meadow. The extent of antimony, arsenic, copper, and zinc concentrations above unrestricted soil SLs are delineated and determined to be localized at a single sample location, where a shell casing was observed, and does not indicate a significant release area. However, lead was identified as a COPC in all three areas sampled during the PEA investigation. Based on the locations of lead concentrations above the recreational trail user soil SL of 540 mg/kg (Table 1, Figures 3 and 4), further delineation of the horizontal and vertical extent of lead in shallow soil in areas not previously investigated at the Site was warranted. This Report presents the results of additional delineation activities for lead.

2.7.6.2 Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons
A total of 48 samples were analyzed for PAHs, including 40 surface samples and 8 shallow samples. PAH concentrations exceeded one or more unrestricted and/or commercial soil SL at eight boring locations in the west meadow only. Benzo(a)pyrene and dibenz(a,h)anthracene, with or without benzo(a)anthracene, benzo(b)fluoranthene, indeno(1,2,3-c,d)pyrene, and naphthalene, exceeded their soil SLs near the historic shooting ranges in the west meadow. PAHs were not detected above reporting limits in the north orchard or east meadow.

42.75 Revised Additional Soil Investigation Report and Human Health Screening Evaluation Lower Main Meadow, Pogonip Open Space, Santa Cruz, California February 17, 2022 RMD ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS, INC. 2-10
Based on this evaluation of potential human health risks from exposure to PAHs in the west meadow of the Lower Main Meadow, Pogonip Open Space (Appendix B), the noncancer adverse health effects or hazard index (HI) does not exceed the USEPA and CalEPA target level of one and the excess cancer risk is within CalEPA’s risk management range of 1 x 10-6 to 1 x 10-4. The cumulative excess cancer risk of 4 x 10-6 slightly exceeds 1 x 10-6 , the most stringent end of the
risk management; but the individual excess cancer risks for PAHs detected in soil did not exceed 1 x 10-6, except for benzo(a)pyrene with an individual risk of 1.4 x 10-6. According to USEPA (1989), cancer risk and hazard index should be expressed using one significant figure. Given the uncertainty in both exposure factors and toxicity data, expressing cancer risk and hazard index with more than one significant figure would imply greater precision than warranted. Therefore, benzo(a)pyrene does not pose a significant human health risk above acceptable thresholds.

Since there are no published soil SLs for recreational receptors, Site-specific risk-based recreational trail user soil SLs were developed for use at the Site. Using the HI and excess cancer risk estimates, soil exposure point concentrations (EPCs), and USEPA and CalEPA target HI and excess cancer risk, risk-based soil SLs were estimated for PAHs detected in soil (Appendix B).

The recreational trail user soil SLs for PAHs detected in shallow soil at the Site are presented in Appendix B.

Based on comparison of detected concentrations with recreational trail user soil SLs, PAHs were identified as COPCs at four boring locations in the west meadow only (Table 2, Figure 4).

Benzo(a)pyrene and/or dibenz(a,h)anthracene exceeded the recreational trail user soil SLs near the historic shooting ranges at borings WM-C-9A, WM-DG-6, WM-DG-11, and WM-DG-13.

PAHs were not detected above reporting limits in the north orchard or east meadow. The extent of PAHs in the west meadow have been delineated to the extent necessary. Additional evaluation of PAHs and a sample-by-sample comparison with background levels and risk-based soil SLs was included in the PEA Report.

42.76 Revised Additional Soil Investigation Report and Human Health Screening Evaluation Lower Main Meadow, Pogonip Open Space, Santa Cruz, California February 17, 2022 RMD ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS, INC. 3-1

3.0 HUMAN HEALTH CONCEPTUAL SITE MODEL
To develop a conceptual understanding of the Site, information regarding potential chemical source, chemical release, and transport mechanisms; locations of potentially exposed human receptors; and potential exposure routes were assessed. This information was previously presented in the PEA Report. Based upon comments from the County, the human health conceptual site model (CSM) was updated to include the hypothetical recreational trail user receptor and hypothetical unauthorized camper receptor. The updated CSM is outlined schematically on Figure 5 and discussed below.

The CSM associates sources of chemicals with potentially exposed human receptors and associated complete exposure pathways. In this way, the CSM assists in quantifying potential impacts to human health. As defined by USEPA (1989), the following four components are necessary for a chemical exposure pathway to be considered complete and for chemical exposure to occur:
• A chemical source and a mechanism of chemical release to the environment; • An environmental transport medium (e.g., soil) for the released chemical; • A point of contact between the contaminated medium and the receptor (i.e., the exposure point); and
• An exposure route (e.g., incidental ingestion of soil) at the exposure point.

As described below, these components provide a basis for the CSM.

3.1 Chemical Source, Release, and Transport
To evaluate the first two components necessary for a complete exposure pathway, chemical properties of the detected chemicals and the physical characteristics of the Site were reviewed to identify factors that might allow the release and transport of chemicals. As discussed in Section 2.0, the potential source of impacts at the Site is related to the deposition of shot and clay target fragments. Based on historic land use as a shooting range and previous Site investigations, the COPCs include metals and PAHs, which tend to adsorb to soil particles and typically do not readily dissolve into water or volatilize into ambient air. Therefore, this CSM focuses on direct contact exposure routes to metals and PAHs in on-Site soil.

42.77 Revised Additional Soil Investigation Report and Human Health Screening Evaluation Lower Main Meadow, Pogonip Open Space, Santa Cruz, California February 17, 2022 RMD ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS, INC. 3-2

3.2 Potential Receptors
The third component necessary for an exposure pathway to be complete is identification of potential receptors at the Site based on anticipated land use. Based on the anticipated future land use as an agricultural and educational farm with a commercial building complex, the following hypothetical receptors were considered in this CSM:
• Future On-Site Unrestricted Receptor; and
• Future On-Site Commercial Worker Receptor.

Based on current and anticipated future land use as a recreational area, the following hypothetical receptors were considered in this CSM:
• Current/Future On-Site Recreational Trail User Receptor; and • Current/Future On-Site Unauthorized Camper Receptor.

As stated in the PEA Report, a future on-Site construction worker receptor will be present during redevelopment of the Site; but this receptor will be a short-term receptor, performing activities subject to applicable administrative controls (e.g., Site Management Plan [SMP], Site Health and Safety Plan [HASP], and best management practices [BMPs]). This receptor is expected to be a short-term outdoor worker (i.e., 2 weeks to 1 year) for a single construction or development project at the Site. The exposures for a construction worker receptor are expected to be limited in comparison to long-term worker receptors.

The hypothetical on-Site receptors included in the CSM are described in more detail below.

3.2.1 Hypothetical On-Site Unrestricted Receptor
The hypothetical future on-Site unrestricted receptor was included to evaluate an unrestricted land use scenario, which is considered the most protective scenario for potential on-Site receptors including farm and garden workers. This receptor is a long-term receptor (i.e., greater than 7 years [USEPA, 1989]) that spends 350 days per year at the Site for a period of 26 years (as both a child [6 years] and an adult [20 years]). The unrestricted land use may include farming and gardening activities for the purpose of cultivating, consuming and/or selling produce (RMD, 2020b).

42.78 Revised Additional Soil Investigation Report and Human Health Screening Evaluation Lower Main Meadow, Pogonip Open Space, Santa Cruz, California February 17, 2022 RMD ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS, INC. 3-3

3.2.2 Hypothetical On-Site Commercial Worker Receptor
The hypothetical future on-Site commercial worker receptor is a long-term adult receptor. This receptor is a full-time employee that is assumed to spend 250 days per year working at the Site for 25 years. This receptor may spend the workday (8 hours per day) both indoors performing light office duties and outdoors performing moderate soil invasive activities in surface or near surface soil (e.g., maintenance or landscaping).

3.2.3 Hypothetical On-Site Recreational Trail User Receptor The recreational trail user receptor is a long-term receptor that may include visitors using the recreational trails at the Site. Based on best professional judgment, this receptor is assumed to visit the Site one day per week (52 days per year) for a period of 26 years (as both a child [6 years] and an adult [20 years]). Potential exposures for this receptor are expected to occur from time spent outdoors only (8 hours per day). Typically, a recreational trail user that frequently visits a site would spend up to 4 hours per day on the trails (Gobster, 2005). It is conservative to assume that the recreational trail user that frequently visits the Site for 52 days a year will be using the trails for 8 hours a day at each visit, considering only short segments of the greater Pogonip Open Space trail system intersect the lead and PAH impacted areas of the Site.

3.2.4 Hypothetical On-Site Unauthorized Camper Receptor Camping is prohibited at the Site and the exposure pathways for this receptor are incomplete due to the implementation of engineering controls to mitigate unauthorized camping at the Site.

However, at the request of the County, the on-Site unauthorized camper receptor was included in the CSM5
. Since camping is prohibited, it is unknown how long the average unauthorized camper receptor stays at the Site. Based on best professional judgment, two exposure frequencies were considered. For one exposure scenario, this receptor is assumed to camp at the Site for 14 days per year. This is consistent with the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) yearly recreational exposure frequency for a recreational visitor, which includes a range of possible activities including camping (BLM, 2017). For the second exposure scenario, this exposure frequency was doubled to be 28 days per year. This receptor is a long-term receptor for a period of 26 years (as both a child [6 years] and an adult [20 years]). Potential exposures 5 In addition, the County requested the development of risk-based soil SLs for the hypothetical unauthorized camper receptor. These soil SLs are presented in Appendix B.

42.79 Revised Additional Soil Investigation Report and Human Health Screening Evaluation Lower Main Meadow, Pogonip Open Space, Santa Cruz, California February 17, 2022 RMD ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS, INC. 3-4
for this receptor are expected to occur from time spent camping outdoors only (24 hours per day).

3.3 Complete Exposure Pathways
The fourth and final component, a complete exposure pathway (i.e., route of exposure) is discussed in combination with the third component (i.e., presence of receptors at an exposure point) to define those exposure pathways considered to be complete and significant for the future on-Site receptors. The exposure pathways assumed to be complete and significant for the hypothetical current/future on-Site receptors includes the following:
• Incidental ingestion of soil;
• Dermal contact with soil; and
• Inhalation of fugitive dust.

As a working farm and garden, it is assumed that the future on-Site farm and garden worker receptor will grow fruits and vegetables to consume and/or sell to the public. The produce sourced from the Pogonip Farm and Garden will only account for a portion of a potential receptors diet; therefore, is not likely a significant exposure pathway. Evaluation of the exposure pathways listed above for an unrestricted land use scenario are considered adequately protective for the proposed future land use at the Site (RMD, 2020b).

3.4 Summary of CSM
This CSM provides a scientifically defensible basis for the selection of potential hypothetical receptors and the most likely ways they might be exposed to chemicals at the Site (Figure 5).

The future on-Site unrestricted and commercial worker receptors were evaluated in the PEA Report and are not considered further in this Report. On-Site camping is prohibited, but at the request of the County the on-Site unauthorized camper receptor was considered and is included in Appendix B. Based on the approved Work Plan scope, the remainder of this report focuses on the on-Site recreational trail user receptor. Due to the presence of COPCs in soil at the Site, further evaluation of potential exposure to COPCs via incidental ingestion of soil, dermal contact with soil, and inhalation of fugitive dust was performed, as described in the following sections.

42.80 Revised Additional Soil Investigation Report and Human Health Screening Evaluation Lower Main Meadow, Pogonip Open Space, Santa Cruz, California February 17, 2022 RMD ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS, INC. 4-1

4.0 SCOPE OF WORK
The following sections describe the pre-field activities, sampling, sample handling, decontamination, and borehole completion procedures.

4.1 Pre-field Activities
The following pre-field activities were conducted prior to mobilizing for the sampling event.

4.1.1 Site Health and Safety Plan
The Site-specific HASP was updated for the planned field activities. Field personnel were required to follow the procedures set forth in the HASP. Based on historical Site information, the work was completed using Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Level D personal protective equipment (PPE).

4.1.2 Site Reconnaissance
On July 26, 2021 and January 6, 2022, RMD and City personnel conducted Site visits to evaluate potential access issues to the proposed sample locations and mark out the locations with survey stakes. Based on these Site visits, several proposed sample locations were shifted.

4.1.3 Borehole Clearance
To confirm the absence of obstructions and as required, the Site was marked with white paint and survey stakes. At least 72 hours before delineation sampling activities were conducted, Underground Services Alert (USA) was notified to mark the locations of potential subsurface utilities beneath the Site.

4.2 Soil Screening and Sampling Locations and Depths
In August 2021 and January 2022, soil samples were collected from 32 boring locations across the Site (Figures 3 and 4) as follows:
• Seven soil borings were located along the southwestern portion of the east meadow; • Fourteen soil borings were located throughout the ravine; • Seven soil borings were located in the Emma McCrary Trail Area in the southeastern portion of the Site;
• Two soil borings were located southwest of the north orchard; and

42.81 Revised Additional Soil Investigation Report and Human Health Screening Evaluation Lower Main Meadow, Pogonip Open Space, Santa Cruz, California February 17, 2022 RMD ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS, INC. 4-2
• Two soil borings were located northwest of the west meadow.

These soil boring locations were needed to fully delineate the lateral and vertical extent of lead concentrations in shallow soil based on findings of previous soil investigations and hypothetical shot fall zones. Soil boring locations and rationale are presented below in Table A.

Table A
Soil Sample Locations and Rationale
Area Sampling Location Rationale
East Meadow EM-34 through EM-40
Evaluate lateral and vertical extent of
lead concentrations between the
southern portion of the east meadow
and ravine
Ravine R-1 through R-14
Improve data density and evaluate
lateral and vertical extent of lead
concentrations in the ravine area
between the east and west meadows
Emma McCrary Trail
Area
T-1 through T-7
Improve data density and evaluate
lateral extent of lead concentrations
south of the east meadow
North Orchard NO-13 and NO-14
Evaluate lateral extent of lead
concentrations northwest of borings
NO-1, NO-2, and NO-4
West Meadow WM-16 and WM-17
Evaluate lateral extent of lead
concentrations northwest of borings
WM-C-1 and WM-DG-1
During field activities, soil boring locations were measured and recorded using a Garmin eTrex 20x handheld global positioning system (GPS) navigator, which has an estimated GPS location accuracy of around 10 feet, 95% of the time, according to the manufacturer. The GPS coordinates of each boring location are included on the field sampling forms presented in Appendix C.

42.82 Revised Additional Soil Investigation Report and Human Health Screening Evaluation Lower Main Meadow, Pogonip Open Space, Santa Cruz, California February 17, 2022 RMD ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS, INC. 4-3

4.3 Soil Logging, Screening, Sampling, and Laboratory Analysis The following presents the soil logging, screening, sampling and laboratory analysis procedures.

Laboratory analyses that were performed by Pace Analytical National Center for Testing & Innovation in Mt. Juliet, Tennessee (Pace), a California-certified laboratory.

4.3.1 Soil Logging
The soil borings were advanced using a hand auger to an approximate depth of 2 feet bgs.

During boring advancement, soil at approximate 6-inch intervals (0-0.5 foot bgs, 0.5-1.0 foot bgs, 1.0-1.5 foot bgs, and 1.5-2.0 foot bgs) was segregated and placed in a clean resealable plastic bag. Soil was visually inspected and logged using the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS). Visual observations were recorded on field forms and are presented in Appendix C.

4.3.2 Soil Screening
Visual Observations: Soil at the surface and from the four 6-inch intervals was visually inspected for evidence of shot fragments. Shot fragments were not observed at any of the boring locations.

XRF Screening: Soil from the four 6-inch intervals was screened in general accordance with USEPA Method 6200 using a handheld Olympus Vanta XRF analyzer to evaluate the vertical distribution of lead in the field. A summary of the XRF measurements includes the following:
• Lead concentrations of more than 1,000 ppm were measured at the following boring locations and depths:
o EM-35 at 0-0.5 foot bgs;
o EM-36 at 0-0.5 foot bgs;
o R-4 at 0-0.5 foot bgs; and
o R-14 at 0-0.5 foot bgs.
• Lead concentrations between 500 ppm and 1,000 ppm were measured at the following boring locations and depths:
o EM-34 at 0.5-1.0 foot bgs;
o EM-37 at 0-0.5 foot bgs;
o EM-39 at 0-0.5 foot bgs;
o R-3 at 0-0.5 foot bgs;
o R-6 at 0-0.5 foot bgs; and
o R-13 at 0-0.5 foot bgs.

42.83 Revised Additional Soil Investigation Report and Human Health Screening Evaluation Lower Main Meadow, Pogonip Open Space, Santa Cruz, California February 17, 2022 RMD ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS, INC. 4-4
The handheld XRF analyzer was factory calibrated. At the beginning of each day, the XRF analyzer was allowed to warm up for 15 to 30 minutes before analysis of samples and checked against a manufacturer-provided standard sample. XRF measurements for each boring location and depth were recorded on field forms (Appendix C). The downloaded XRF data are presented in Appendix D.

4.3.3 Soil Sample Selection
Two soil samples were collected from each boring location as follows:
• Of the 0-0.5 foot bgs, 0.5-1.0 foot bgs, and 1.0-1.5 foot bgs aliquots, the “surface” soil sample6 was selected based on the 6-inch soil interval with the highest XRF reading. In the absence of field screening indicators (i.e., shot fragments or elevated XRF readings), the 0-0.5 foot bgs soil interval was collected; and
• The 1.5-2.0 foot bgs soil interval (the “shallow” soil sample).

4.3.4 Soil Sampling Procedures
Soil samples were collected in laboratory-supplied glass jars. The sample containers were labeled, placed in sealable, plastic bags, and stored in a chilled cooler for transportation to Pace, under standard chain-of-custody procedures.

4.3.5 Soil Analyses
At borings R-1 through R-14, T-1 through T-3, NO-13 and NO-14, and WM-16 and WM-17 where XRF readings for lead were less than 250 mg/kg, soil samples were collected and placed on hold at the laboratory pending analysis of the initial soil samples.

At borings EM-34 through EM-40 and at borings R-1 through R-14, T-1 through T-3, NO-13 and NO-14, and WM-16 and WM-17 where XRF readings for lead were greater than 250 mg/kg, soil samples were analyzed at the laboratory. Additionally, at borings where XRF readings were less than 250 mg/kg but were located adjacent to borings with elevated lead concentrations, soil samples were analyzed at the laboratory to define lateral extent of lead in soil. The samples were analyzed for lead using USEPA Method 6020. Prior to analysis, samples were sieved at the laboratory using a No. 10 sieve.
6 During the 2019 and 2020 soil investigations, the 0-0.5 foot bgs samples was referred to as the surface soil sample.

This Report applies “surface” soil sample to the 6-inch interval selected for analysis from the upper 1.5 feet bgs.

42.84 Revised Additional Soil Investigation Report and Human Health Screening Evaluation Lower Main Meadow, Pogonip Open Space, Santa Cruz, California February 17, 2022 RMD ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS, INC. 4-5
Laboratory analytical reports are presented in Appendix E. Analytical results are summarized on Table 1 and in Section 5.0.

4.4 Borehole Completion
Following completion of soil screening and sampling activities, each boring was backfilled to the surface with soil cuttings.

4.5 Decontamination Procedures
Disposable equipment intended for one-time use was packaged for appropriate disposal.

Reusable augering and sampling devices that were in contact with potentially contaminated soil were decontaminated between each boring location using the following procedures:

1. Knock off loose soil with a brush;

2. Wash with non-phosphate detergent and tap water;

3. Rinse with tap-water;

4. Rinse with distilled water; and

5. Set on clean surface to air dry.

Decontamination was repeated if observable or suspected organic material remained on the sampling equipment.

4.6 Investigation-Derived Waste Handling
The investigation-derived waste (IDW) generated during the field activities included several gallons of decontamination water with phosphate free soap. The IDW water was discharged to the ground and left to evaporate on Site.

4.7 Field Variances
Following review of XRF readings, soil samples were collected from two additional borings located west of boring R-4 that were not proposed in the Work Plan. The two additional borings (R-13 and R-14) were each advanced to approximately two feet bgs and soil samples were selected using the same criteria described above.

42.85 Revised Additional Soil Investigation Report and Human Health Screening Evaluation Lower Main Meadow, Pogonip Open Space, Santa Cruz, California February 17, 2022 RMD ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS, INC. 5-1

5.0 HUMAN HEALTH SCREENING EVALUATION OF LEAD ANALYTICAL RESULTS Based on the approved Work Plan scope, the locations of lead concentrations above the recreational trail user soil SL of 540 mg/kg (Table 1, Figures 3 and 4) were delineated further. In accordance with the methods and procedures described in Section 4.3, a total of 46 samples7 were analyzed for lead. Consistent with the approved Work Plan scope, the human health screening evaluation (HHSE) compared the lead results to the recreational trail user soil SL of 540 mg/kg. In addition to a point-by-point screening level evaluation, the soil data were evaluated separately for each designated use area (i.e., west meadow, east meadow, north orchard, ravine, recreational trail). Table 1 summarizes the analytical results and presents a point-by-point screening level evaluation, highlighting any lead concentrations that exceed the recreational trail user soil SL of 540 mg/kg. The laboratory analytical results are provided in Appendix E. Figure 3 depicts the locations of soil samples analyzed for lead with concentrations exceeding the recreational trail user SL shown and highlighted.

This HHSE was prepared in general accordance with the HHSE for lead presented in the PEA Report. This HHSE was conducted to further evaluate potential exposures associated with the anticipated future land uses to identify the need for any remediation, mitigation, or engineering controls to adequately protect human health. The anticipated future land uses include the continuation of recreational trail use, natural resource and trail maintenance, and a planned building complex as part of an agriculture farm and garden (i.e., perennial orchards and row crops) in relatively flat portions of the Site. The potential source of soil impacts at the Site is related to the deposition of lead shot fragments based on former land use as a shooting range.

It is unlikely that a potential receptor will spend the entire exposure duration (i.e., years) residing over maximum detected concentrations in soil. Therefore, for lead in soil, it is relevant and appropriate to statistically evaluate the soil data separately within each designated use area for the purpose of making risk management decisions. Consistent with USEPA (1989) procedures, when evaluating a reasonable maximum exposure scenario, the lesser of the maximum detected concentration and the 95-percent upper confidence limit of the mean concentration (95UCL)8 7 Sample EM-35-2’ initially reported a lead concentration of 5,810 mg/kg and was reanalyzed to confirm the result.

The reanalyzed sample reported a lead concentration of 198 mg/kg. 8 A USEPA software package, ProUCL Version 5.1, was used to estimate the 95UCL. The ProUCL software makes recommendations for estimating UCLs and was developed as a tool to support risk assessment.

42.86 Revised Additional Soil Investigation Report and Human Health Screening Evaluation Lower Main Meadow, Pogonip Open Space, Santa Cruz, California February 17, 2022 RMD ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS, INC. 5-2
will be selected as the appropriate soil EPC for each designated use area and compared to the recreational trail user soil SL of 540 mg/kg.

The HHSE for lead concentrations detected in soil for each designated use area are described below.

5.1 Analytical Summary
East Meadow
Based on soil data collected during the August 2021 investigation, lead was detected above laboratory reporting limits (RLs) in each of the 14 samples analyzed at concentrations ranging from 323 mg/kg to 2,090 mg/kg in the surface samples and from 14.7 mg/kg to 220 mg/kg in the shallow samples. Lead concentrations exceeded the soil SL of 540 mg/kg in four surface samples and none of the shallow samples.

When considering the soil data collected during the May 2020 and August 2021 investigations for the east meadow, the 95UCLs for surface and shallow soil samples were 702 mg/kg and 92 mg/kg, respectively (Appendix F). The 95UCLs were less than the maximum detected concentrations for surface and shallow soil samples; therefore, 95UCLs were selected as the appropriate EPC for comparison with the soil SL. The lead EPC for surface soil exceeded the soil SL of 540 mg/kg and the lead EPC for shallow soil did not exceed the soil SL.

Ravine
Based on soil data collected during the August 2021 investigation9, lead was detected above RLs in each of the 24 samples analyzed at concentrations ranging from 9.86 mg/kg to 1,600 mg/kg in the surface samples and from 6.59 mg/kg to 341 mg/kg in the shallow samples.

Lead concentrations exceeded the soil SL of 540 mg/kg in five surface samples and none of the shallow samples.

The 95UCLs for surface and shallow soil samples were 884 mg/kg and 170 mg/kg, respectively (Appendix F). The 95UCLs were less than the maximum detected concentrations for surface and shallow soil samples; therefore, 95UCLs were selected as the appropriate EPC for comparison with the soil SL. The lead EPC for surface soil exceeded the soil SL of 540 mg/kg and the lead EPC for shallow soil did not exceed the soil SL. At two borings (R-8 and R-12), XRF readings ranged from 28 ppm to 98 ppm and soil samples were not analyzed at the laboratory.

Emma McCrary Trail Area
9 The ravine area was not sampled during previous Site investigations.

42.87 Revised Additional Soil Investigation Report and Human Health Screening Evaluation Lower Main Meadow, Pogonip Open Space, Santa Cruz, California February 17, 2022 RMD ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS, INC. 5-3
Lead was detected above RLs in each of the eight samples collected and analyzed from the Emma McCrary Trail Area at concentrations ranging from 153 mg/kg to 474 mg/kg in the four surface samples and 7.07 mg/kg to 9.42 mg/kg in the four shallow samples. Lead concentrations did not exceed the soil SL of 540 mg/kg10.

At three borings (T-1, T-2, and T-4), XRF readings ranged from 6 ppm to 48 ppm and soil samples were not analyzed at the laboratory.

North Orchard
Based on soil data collected during the August 2021 investigation, XRF readings ranged from 3 ppm to 56 ppm at borings NO-13 and NO-14. The corresponding samples were not analyzed for lead.

When considering the soil data collected during the May 2020 and August 2021 investigations for the north orchard, the 95UCLs for surface and shallow soil samples were 312 mg/kg and 32 mg/kg, respectively (Appendix F). The 95UCLs were less than the maximum detected concentrations for surface and shallow soil samples; therefore, 95UCLs were selected as the appropriate EPC for comparison with the soil SL. The lead EPCs for surface and shallow soil did not exceed the soil SL of 540 mg/kg.

West Meadow
Based on soil data collected during the August 2021 investigation, XRF readings ranged from 3 ppm to 133 ppm at borings WM-16 and WM-17. The corresponding samples were not analyzed for lead.

When considering the soil data collected during the May 2020 and August 2021 investigations for the west meadow, the 95UCLs for surface and shallow soil samples were 163 mg/kg and 34 mg/kg, respectively (Appendix F). The 95UCLs were less than the maximum detected concentrations for surface and shallow soil samples; therefore, 95UCLs were selected as the appropriate EPC for comparison with the soil SL. The lead EPCs for surface and shallow soil did not exceed the soil SL of 540 mg/kg.

5.2 Findings
The following summarizes the findings of the field sampling and laboratory analysis:
10 Soil samples were not collected from the Emma McCrary Trail Area during previous Site investigations. Since maximum detected lead concentrations were below the soil SL of 540 mg/kg and the analytical data set only included 8 samples, a 95UCL was not estimated.

42.88 Revised Additional Soil Investigation Report and Human Health Screening Evaluation Lower Main Meadow, Pogonip Open Space, Santa Cruz, California February 17, 2022 RMD ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS, INC. 5-4
• Lead shot fragments were not observed during field screening of soil samples. As shown on the graph below, XRF readings exhibit a favorable correlation with lead concentrations in associated sieved soil samples. The absence of observed shot fragments and favorable correlation between XRF readings and lead concentrations in sieved soil samples suggest that the shot has dissolved and associated metals have sorbed to soil during the more than 60 years since deposition.

Lead concentrations indicated the following:

East Meadow
Lead exceeded the recreational trail user soil SL in surface samples collected from the southwestern portion of the east meadow along the border with the ravine. Lead did not exceed the soil SL in shallow samples collected from the east meadow. In the east meadow, lead concentrations above the soil SL are delineated by borings EM-6, EM-17, EM-18, and EM-19 to the north, borings EM-20, EM-22, and EM-39 to the east, borings EM-38 and EM-40 to the south, and borings R-2, R-5, R-7, R-10, and R-11 to the west.
y = 1.1176x - 14.817
R² = 0.9128
0 500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
0 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200 1,400 1,600 1,800 2,000
Lead (mg/Kg)
XRF (ppm)
XRF Readings and Lead Concentrations

42.89 Revised Additional Soil Investigation Report and Human Health Screening Evaluation Lower Main Meadow, Pogonip Open Space, Santa Cruz, California February 17, 2022 RMD ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS, INC. 5-5
Ravine
Lead exceeded the soil SL in surface samples collected from the northwestern and eastern portions of the ravine. Lead did not exceed the soil SL in shallow samples collected from the ravine. In the northwestern portion of the ravine, lead concentrations above soil SL are delineated by borings B-7, B-8, B-9, and R-1 to the north, borings R-2 and R-5 to the east, borings R-9 and WM-C-4 to the south, and borings B-5 and B-6 to the west. In the ravine, lead concentrations above the soil SL are delineated by borings EM-3, EM-4, and EM-5 to the north, borings EM-6, EM-19, EM-20, EM-22, and EM-39 to the east, borings R-7 and R-11 to the south, and borings R-2, R-5, and R-10 to the west.

Emma McCrary Trail Area
Based on lead concentrations at borings T-3, T-5, T-6, and T-7 and XRF readings at borings T-1, T-2, and T-4 lead did not exceed the soil SL in samples collected in this area.

North Orchard
Based on XRF readings at borings NO-13 and NO-14, lead did not exceed the soil SL in samples collected southwest of the north orchard. In the north orchard, the lead concentration above the soil SL at boring NO-3 is delineated by boring NO-4 to the north, boring B-7 to the east, boring B-6 to the south, and borings NO-1 and NO-2 to the west.

West Meadow
Based on XRF readings at borings WM-16 and WM-17, lead did not exceed the soil SL in samples collected northwest of the west meadow. In the west meadow, the lead concentration above the soil SL at boring WM-DG-13 is delineated by boring WM-C-9(A) to the north, borings WM-C-10 and WM-DG-15 to the east, boring WM-C-6 to the south, and boring WM-DG-14 to the west.

Based on findings of this Report and previous Site investigations, lead concentrations in soil are adequately delineated laterally and vertically and lead concentrations above the recreational trail user SL are limited to surface soil in previously identified areas, as described above.

42.90 Revised Additional Soil Investigation Report and Human Health Screening Evaluation Lower Main Meadow, Pogonip Open Space, Santa Cruz, California February 17, 2022 RMD ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS, INC. 6-1

6.0 CONCLUSIONS
As presented herein, lead and PAHs associated with shot and clay target deposition in soil from historic shooting range activities have been identified and adequately delineated at the Site.

COPCs identified in prior investigations include select metals, primarily lead, and PAHs. The HHSE was revised to further characterize risk and evaluate lead concentrations above the recreational trail user SL.. The findings of the HHSE indicate that lead concentrations above the recreational trail user SL are limited to surface soil at the Site, as follows and displayed on Figures 3 and 411:
• East Meadow – Lead concentrations exceeded the soil SL in surface samples collected from the southwestern portion of this area.
• Ravine – Lead concentrations exceeded the soil SL in surface samples collected from the northwestern and eastern portions of this area.
• North Orchard – The lead concentration exceeded the soil SL in the surface sample collected from boring NO-3, in the southwestern portion of this area. • West Meadow – The lead concentration exceeded the soil SL in the surface sample collected from boring WM-DG-13, in the southern portion of this area.

Lead concentrations did not exceed the recreational trail user SL in samples collected in the Emma McCrary Trail Area.

The findings of the HHSE indicate that PAH concentrations above the recreational trail user SLs are limited to soil in the west meadow at the Site, as follows and displayed on Figure 413:
• West Meadow – PAH concentrations exceeded the soil SLs in the surface samples collected from borings WM-C-9A, WM-DG-11, and WM-DG-13; and in the shallow sample collected from boring WM-DG-6 in the central portion of this area near the former shooting pads.

PAH concentrations did not exceed the soil SLs in samples collected in the north orchard and east meadow. PAHs were not analyzed in soil samples collected from the ravine or Emma McCrary Trail Area.
11 Figure 6 shows areas where lead and PAH concentrations exceeded the soil SLs for unrestricted land use.

42.91 Revised Additional Soil Investigation Report and Human Health Screening Evaluation Lower Main Meadow, Pogonip Open Space, Santa Cruz, California February 17, 2022 RMD ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS, INC. 6-2
Based on our evaluation of the Site conditions, consideration of the following activities is recommended:
• Prepare a draft Covenant and Environmental Restriction to establish the following use restrictions and controls for the Site:
o Restrict land use in areas where COPCs may pose a human health risk at the Site (i.e., modify the proposed farm and garden development plan to restrict access to areas where soil samples exceed unrestricted SLs); and o Implement engineering controls (e.g., soil amendments or fence and post notices) and remediate (e.g., surface soil excavation and on-Site burial or off-Site disposal) in areas where COPC concentrations exceed SLs for the current and proposed land uses to reduce potential exposures.
o Implement engineering controls to mitigate unauthorized camping at the Site. • Prepare a Soil Management Plan to provide guidance for working around and handling potentially impacted soil encountered during Site activities.

42.92 Revised Additional Soil Investigation Report and Human Health Screening Evaluation Lower Main Meadow, Pogonip Open Space, Santa Cruz, California February 17, 2022 RMD ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS, INC. 7-1

7.0 LIMITATIONS
This document was prepared for the exclusive use of the City and County for the express purpose of complying with a client or regulatory directive for environmental investigation or restoration.

RMD has used professional judgment to present the findings and opinions of a scientific and technical nature. The opinions expressed are based on the conditions of the Site existing at the time of the field investigation, current regulatory requirements, and any specified assumptions.

The presented findings and recommendations in this report are intended to be taken in their entirety to assist City and County personnel in applying their own professional judgment in making decisions related to the property. No warranty or guarantee, whether expressed or implied, is made with respect to the data or the reported findings, observations, conclusions, and recommendations.

42.93 Revised Additional Soil Investigation Report and Human Health Screening Evaluation Lower Main Meadow, Pogonip Open Space, Santa Cruz, California February 17, 2022 RMD ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS, INC. 8-1

8.0 REFERENCES
Bureau of Land Management (BLM), 2017. BLM Technical Memorandum, Screening Assessment Approaches for Metals in Soil at BLM HazMat/AML Sites. September 2017 Update.

County of Santa Cruz, 2021. Response to Additional Soil Investigation Report and Human Health Evaluation, Pogonip Open Space, 501 Golf Club Drive, Santa Cruz, CA. December 15.

Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), 2011. User’s Guide to LeadSpread 8 and Recommendations for Evaluation of Lead Exposures in Adults. Department of Toxic Substances Control. September.

DTSC, 2015. Preliminary Endangerment Assessment Guidance Manual. Interim Final - Revised.

October.

DTSC, 2020. Human Health Risk Assessment (HHRA) Note Number 3, DTSC recommended methodology for use of U.S. EPA Regional Screening Levels (RSLs) in Human Health Risk Assessment process at hazardous waste sites and permitted facilities. June.

Duvergé, D.J., 2011. Establishing Background Arsenic in Soil of the Urbanized San Francisco Bay Region. A thesis submitted to the faculty of San Francisco State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Master of Science in Geosciences.

December.

Environmental Investigation Services, Inc. (EIS), 2019. Soil Sampling Investigation Report, Pogonip Farm and Garden in Santa Cruz, CA. April 9.

Gobster, PH, 2005. Recreation and Leisure research from an active living perspective: Taking a second look at urban trail use data. Leisure Sciences 27:367-383.

Homeless Garden Project (HGP), 2017. Operations and Management Plan, Pogonip Farm & Garden. March.

HGP, 2019. Report: Soil Lead Levels in the Lower Main Meadow of Pogonip. January 18.

Interstate Technology & Regulatory Council (ITRC), 2005. Environmental Management at Operating Outdoor Small Arms Firing Ranges. February.

RMD Environmental Solutions, Inc. (RMD), 2020a. Preliminary Endangerment Assessment Work Plan. Pogonip Farm and Garden, Santa Cruz, California. May 5.

RMD, 2020b. Preliminary Endangerment Assessment Report, Pogonip Farm and Garden, 333 Golf Club Drive, Santa Cruz, California. August 10.

RMD, 2021a. Delineation of Lead-Impacted Soil Work Plan, Pogonip Farm and Garden, 333 Golf Club Drive, Santa Cruz, California. May 26.

42.94 Revised Additional Soil Investigation Report and Human Health Screening Evaluation Lower Main Meadow, Pogonip Open Space, Santa Cruz, California February 17, 2022 RMD ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS, INC. 8-2
RMD, 2021b. Additional Soil Investigation Report and Human Health Screening Evaluation.

Lower Main Meadow, Pogonip Open Space, 501 Golf Club Drive, Santa Cruz, California.

October 15.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), 1989. Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund, Human Health Evaluation Manual, Part A. Interim Final. Solid Waste and Emergency Response. December.

USEPA, 2021. Regional Screening Level (RSL) Summary Table (TR=1E-6, HQ=1). May.

Weber, Hayes & Associates (WHA), 2019. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment for Recreational Open Space Property. November 19.

WHA, 2021. Access Road Lead Sample Results. March.

42.95 FIGURES

42.96 SITE LOCATION MAP LOWER MAIN MEADOW, POGONIP OPEN SPACE 501 GOLF CLUB DRIVE SANTA CRUZ, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. DATE DR.BY: APP. BY: 01-POG-001 10/2021 EC DW FIGURE 1N SCALE: 1" = 2000' 0 2000 4000 Map Source: USGS, 2018 SITE LOCATION 42.97 PROPOSED BUILDING COMPLEX 770' 600' 400' 325' 200' POGONIP CLUBHOUSE FORMER HORSE STABLE NORTH ORCHARD WEST MEADOW RAVINE EAST MEADOW EMMA McCRARY TRAIL AREA 01-POG-001 10/2021 EC DW PROJECT NO. DATE DRAWN BY: APP. BY: FIGURE 2 SITE PLAN LOWER MAIN MEADOW, POGONIP OPEN SPACE 501 GOLF CLUB DRIVE SANTA CRUZ, CA N LEGEND PROPOSED WEST MEADOW BOUNDARY 50' WETLAND BUFFER (NO PLANTING) SHOOTING PAD LOCATION 100' WETLAND BUFFER (NATIVE PLANTS) UNKNOWN CONCRETE PAD SCALE: 1" = 150' 0 150 300 HYPOTHETICAL RANGE OF HIGHEST LEAD SHOT CONCENTRATION (~400'-600') HYPOTHETICAL RANGE OF CLAY TARGETS (~200'-325') PROPOSED EAST MEADOW BOUNDARY Notes: 1) Hypothetical Ranges of Lead Shot and Clay Pigeons Are Based On Standard Skeet Shooting Range Shot Fall Zones. (ITRC, 2015) 2) Proposed Garden Boundaries and Building Complex Based on GPS Coordinate Plan (Fall Creek Engineering, Inc, 2018) and Map of Pogonip Farm & Garden (Homeless Garden Project O&M Plan, 2017) APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF SEASONAL WETLAND HYPOTHETICAL RANGE OF LEAD SHOT (~200'-770') WEST MEADOW PROPOSED NORTH ORCHARD BOUNDARY APPROXIMATE RAVINE AREA 42.98

PROPOSED BUILDING COMPLEX
770'
600'
400'
325'
200' POGONIP CLUBHOUSE FORMER HORSE STABLE NORTH ORCHARD NO-1 NO-5 NO-8 NO-10 NO-9 NO-11 NO-12 EM-23EM-13 EM-25 EM-29 EM-30EM-31 EM-18 EM-32 EM-33 EM-22 EM-28 EM-17 EM-16 EM-27 EM-15 EM-26 EM-14 EM-24 EM-12 EM-19 EM-20 NO-7 NO-2 WM-C-1 WM-C-2 WEST MEADOW B9N B1W B13NB13E B12N B2W B2S B2N B4N B4WB12W B13S B12S B10W B10S B9W B1S B13W B11NB6W B6N B4E B5N B5E B5W B3W B9EB8S B12E B9S B10E B11W B11S B10N B11E B6S B2EB3S B4S B3E B7NB5S B8E B8W B7S B7W B8NB7E B6E B3N B1N B1EWM-DG-3 WM-DG-5 WM-DG-4 WM-DG-2 WM-C-7 WM-C-6 WM-C-8 WM-DG-14 WM-DG-12 WM-C-9(A) WM-DG-15 WM-DG-6 WM-C-10 WM-C-5 WM-C-4 WM-DG-7 WM-DG-8WM-DG-9 WM-DG-10 WM-C-11 NO-3 NO-4 NO-6 EM-1 EM-2 EM-3 EM-4 EM-11 EM-10 EM-9 EM-7 EM-8 EM-6 EM-5 EM-21 WM-DG-11(A) WM-C-3 WM-DG-13 WM-DG-1 EM-34 EM-35 EM-36 EM-37 EM-38 EM-40 R-12 R-8 T-2 RAVINE EM-39 B-1 B-2B-3 B-4 B-5 B-6 B-7 B-8 B-9 B-10 B-11 B-12 T-1 WM-17WM-16 NO-14 NO-13 R-10 R-11 R-9 R-13 R-14 R-1 R-4 R-2 R-5 R-3 R-6 R-7 EAST MEADOW T-3 EMMA McCRARY TRAIL AREA T-4 T-5 T-6T-7 PROJECT NO. DATE DRAWN BY: APP. BY: FIGURE 3 LEAD CONCENTRATIONS EXCEEDING SCREENING LEVEL FOR RECREATIONAL TRAIL USE R
LOWER MAIN MEADOW, POGONIP OPEN SPACE 501 GOLF CLUB DRIVE SANTA CRUZ, CA 01-POG-001 02/2022 EC DW

N SHOOTING PAD LOCATION
0 SCALE: 1" = 150' 150 300 ANALYTICAL RESULT IN MILLIGRAMS PER KILOGRAM (mg/kg) X-RAY FLUORESCENCE SOIL SAMPLE LOCATION (RMD, 2020) UNKNOWN CONCRETE PAD APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF SEASONAL WETLAND SOIL SAMPLE LOCATION (EIS, 2019) Notes: 1) Yellow highlighted locations and values exceed the screening level for recreational trail use (540 mg/kg). 2) Data shown only for locations with lead concentration exceeding the recreational trail use screening level. 3) Hypothetical Ranges of Lead Shot and Clay Pigeons Are Based On Standard Skeet Shooting Range Shot Fall Zones (ITRC, 2015). 4) Proposed Garden Boundaries and Building Complex Based on GPS Coordinate Plan (Fall Creek Engineering, Inc, 2018) and Map of Pogonip Farm & Garden (Homeless Garden Project O&M Plan, 2017). WM-DG-13 Depth Lead 1.5 FT 1,230 2 FT 49.0 NO-3 Depth Lead 0.5 FT 690 2 FT 45.3 EM-7 Depth Lead 0.5 FT 752 2 FT 117 EM-8 Depth Lead 1 FT 717 2 FT 140 EM-9 Depth Lead 0.5 FT 1,140 2 FT 81.9 EM-10 Depth Lead 0.5 FT 1,670 2 FT 34.1 EM-11 Depth Lead 0.5 FT 856 2 FT 140 EM-21 Depth Lead 0.5 FT 769 2 FT 9.52 22.1 0.5 FT DEPTH IN FEET BELOW GROUND SURFACE XRF LEGEND PROPOSED WEST MEADOW BOUNDARY 50' WETLAND BUFFER (NO PLANTING) 100' WETLAND BUFFER (NATIVE PLANTS) PROPOSED EAST MEADOW BOUNDARY PROPOSED NORTH ORCHARD BOUNDARY APPROXIMATE RAVINE AREA SOIL SAMPLE LOCATION (WHA, 2021) SOIL SAMPLE LOCATION (RMD, 2021) XRF SCREENING LOCATION (RMD, 2021) XRF SCREENING LOCATION (RMD, 2022) SOIL SAMPLE LOCATION (RMD,2022) EM-34 Depth Lead 1 FT 637 2 FT 37.9 EM-35 Depth Lead 0.5 FT 1,800 2 FT 198 EM-36 Depth Lead 0.5 FT 2,090 2 FT 28.6 EM-37 Depth Lead 0.5 FT 571 2 FT 14.7 R-3 Depth Lead 0.5 FT 1,530 2 FT 31.4 R-4 Depth Lead 0.5 FT 1,600 2 FT 23.7 R-6 Depth Lead 0.5 FT 573 2 FT 341 R-13 Depth Lead 0.5 FT 686 2 FT 31.9 R-14 Depth Lead 0.5 FT 1,220 2 FT 10.9 42.99 PROPOSED BUILDING COMPLEX POGONIP CLUBHOUSE FORMER HORSE STABLE NORTH ORCHARD NO-1 NO-5 NO-8 NO-10 NO-9 NO-11 NO-12 EM-23EM-13 EM-25 EM-29 EM-30EM-31 EM-18 EM-32 EM-33 EM-22 EM-28 EM-17 EM-16 EM-27 EM-15 EM-26 EM-14 EM-24 EM-12 EM-19 EM-20 NO-7 NO-2 WM-C-1 WM-C-2 B1W WEST MEADOW B9N B13NB13E B12N B2WB2N B4N B4WB12W B13S B12S B10W B10S B9W B1S B13W B11NB6W B6N B4E B5N B5E B5W B3W B9EB8S B12E B9S B10E B11W B11S B10N B11E B6S B2EB3S B4S B3E B7NB5S B8E B8W B7S B7W B8NB7E B6E B3N B1N B1EWM-DG-3 WM-DG-5 WM-DG-4 WM-DG-2 WM-C-7 WM-C-6 WM-C-8 WM-DG-14 WM-DG-12 WM-DG-15 WM-C-10 WM-C-5 WM-C-4 WM-DG-7 WM-DG-8WM-DG-9 WM-DG-10 WM-C-11 NO-3 NO-4 NO-6 EM-1 EM-2 EM-3 EM-4 EM-11 EM-10 EM-9 EM-7 EM-8 EM-6 EM-5 EM-21 WM-C-3 WM-DG-1 EM-34 EM-35 EM-36 EM-37 EM-38 EM-40 R-12 R-8 T-2 RAVINE EM-39 B-1 B-2B-3 B-4 B-5 B-6 B-7 B-8 B-9 B-10 B-11 B-12 T-1 WM-17WM-16 NO-14 NO-13 R-10 R-11 R-9 R-13 R-14 R-1 R-4 R-2 R-5 R-3 R-6 R-7 EAST MEADOW T-3 EMMA McCRARY TRAIL AREA WM-DG-13 B2SWM-DG-6 WM-DG-11(A) WM-C-9(A) T-4 T-5 T-6T-7 PROJECT NO. DATE DRAWN BY: APP. BY: FIGURE 4 AREAS EXCEEDING SCREENING LEVEL FOR RECREATIONAL TRAIL USE LOWER MAIN MEADOW, POGONIP OPEN SPACE 501 GOLF CLUB DRIVE SANTA CRUZ, CA 01-POG-001 01/2022 EC DWN SHOOTING PAD LOCATION 0 SCALE: 1" = 150' 150 300 SOIL SAMPLE LOCATION (RMD, 2020) UNKNOWN CONCRETE PAD APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF SEASONAL WETLAND SOIL SAMPLE LOCATION (EIS, 2019) Notes: 1) Hypothetical Ranges of Lead Shot and Clay Pigeons Are Based On Standard Skeet Shooting Range Shot Fall Zones (ITRC, 2015). 2) Proposed Garden Boundaries and Building Complex Based on GPS Coordinate Plan (Fall Creek Engineering, Inc, 2018) and Map of Pogonip Farm & Garden (Homeless Garden Project O&M Plan, 2017). XRF LEGEND PROPOSED WEST MEADOW BOUNDARY 50' WETLAND BUFFER (NO PLANTING) 100' WETLAND BUFFER (NATIVE PLANTS) PROPOSED EAST MEADOW BOUNDARY PROPOSED NORTH ORCHARD BOUNDARY APPROXIMATE RAVINE AREA SOIL SAMPLE LOCATION (WHA, 2021) SOIL SAMPLE LOCATION (RMD, 2021) XRF SCREENING LOCATION (RMD, 2021) XRF SCREENING LOCATION (RMD, 2022) SOIL SAMPLE LOCATION (RMD,2022) X-RAY FLUORESCENCE APPROXIMATE AREA EXCEEDING LEAD SCREENING LEVEL FOR RECREATIONAL TRAIL USE APPROXIMATE AREA EXCEEDING POLYCYCLIC AROMATIC HYDROCARBON SCREENING LEVELS FOR RECREATIONAL TRAIL USE 42.100 Exposure Point
of Contact
Medium
Exposure
Route
Indoor Air Inhalation
Outdoor Air Inhalation
Wind Fugitive Dust Outdoor Air Inhalation d
Ingestion d
Dermal Contact d
Ingestion
Indoor Air Inhalation
Outdoor Air Inhalation
Ingestion
Dermal Contact
Ingestion
Dermal Contact
Inhalation
CSM components related to soil. Receptor likely to be exposed via this route, so pathway is considered potentially complete.

CSM components related to groundwater. Receptor may be exposed via this route, so pathway is considered potentially complete; however, pathway is considered minor.

CSM components related to surface water. Pathway is incomplete, no further evaluation required.

Groundwaterc
Surface Water/
Sedimenta
Leaching
Primary
Sources
Hypothetical Receptors
Primary
Transport
Mechanism
Future
Unrestricted
Plant Uptake Farm and Garden
Produce
Soil
Secondary
Sources
Secondary
Transport
Mechanism
Tertiary
Transport
Mechanism
FIGURE
5 Soil Invasive
Activitiesb
Runoff/Erosion
Tertiary
Sources
Volatilization
Volatilization
d
Camping is prohibited at the Site and the exposure pathways for this receptor are incomplete due to the implementation of engineering controls to mitigate unauthorized camping at the Site.

Deposition Former Shooting
Range
Current/Future
Unauthorized
Camper
On-Site
Groundwater Invasive
Activities
Future
Commercial
Worker
Current/Future
Recreational
Trail User

HUMAN HEALTH CONCEPTUAL SITE MODEL POGONIP FARM AND GARDEN

SANTA CRUZ, CALIFORNIA
a
With the exception of the seasonal wetland, there are no identified surface water bodies within a one-half mile radius of the site. b
Surface invasive activities are not expected to extend beyond 2 feet bgs. c
Perched shallow groundwater supports seasonal wetlands and seeps. A 345 foot deep water supply well near the Pogonip clubhouse reported a depth to water of 128 feet below ground surface (bgs) in 1993. Due to depth to groundwater, it is not a media of concern at the site.

Soil
PROJECT NO. DATE
01-POG-001 02/02/22 II
DRAWN BY APP. BY
DW

42.101
PROPOSED BUILDING COMPLEX POGONIP CLUBHOUSE FORMER HORSE STABLE NORTH ORCHARD NO-1 NO-5 NO-8 NO-10 NO-9 NO-11 NO-12 EM-23EM-13 EM-25 EM-29 EM-30EM-31 EM-18 EM-32 EM-33 EM-22 EM-28 EM-17 EM-16 EM-27 EM-15 EM-26 EM-14 EM-24 EM-12 EM-19 EM-20 NO-7 NO-2 WM-C-1 WM-C-2 B1W WEST MEADOW B9N B13NB13E B12N B2WB2N B4N B4WB12W B13S B12S B10W B10S B9W B1S B13W B11NB6W B6N B4E B5N B5E B5W B3W B9EB8S B12E B9S B10E B11W B11S B10N B11E B6S B2EB3S B4S B3E B7NB5S B8E B8W B7S B7W B8NB7E B6E B3N B1N B1EWM-DG-3 WM-DG-5 WM-DG-4 WM-DG-2 WM-C-7 WM-C-6 WM-C-8 WM-DG-14 WM-DG-12 WM-DG-15 WM-C-10 WM-C-5 WM-C-4 WM-DG-7 WM-DG-8WM-DG-9 WM-DG-10 WM-C-11 NO-3 NO-4 NO-6 EM-1 EM-2 EM-3 EM-4 EM-11 EM-10 EM-9 EM-7 EM-8 EM-6 EM-5 EM-21 WM-C-3 WM-DG-1 EM-34 EM-35 EM-36 EM-37 EM-38 EM-40 R-12 R-8 T-2 RAVINE EM-39 B-1 B-2B-3 B-4 B-5 B-6 B-7 B-8 B-9 B-10 B-11 B-12 T-1 WM-17WM-16 NO-14 NO-13 R-10 R-11 R-9 R-13 R-14 R-1 R-4 R-2 R-5 R-3 R-6 R-7 EAST MEADOW T-3 EMMA McCRARY TRAIL AREA WM-DG-13 B2SWM-DG-6 WM-DG-11(A) WM-C-9(A) T-4 T-5 T-6T-7 PROJECT NO. DATE DRAWN BY: APP. BY: FIGURE 6 AREAS EXCEEDING SCREENING LEVELS FOR UNRESTRICTED LAND USE LOWER MAIN MEADOW, POGONIP OPEN SPACE 501 GOLF CLUB DRIVE SANTA CRUZ, CA 01-POG-001 01/2022 EC DW

N LEGEND
0 SCALE: 1" = 150' 150 300 Notes: 1) Yellow highlighted sample locations exceed the lead screening level for unrestricted land use. 2) Orange highlighted sample locations exceed the polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon screening levels for unrestricted land use. 3) Sample location WM-DG-13 also reports antimony, arsenic, copper, and zinc exceeding screening levels for unrestricted land use. 4) Shot fragments observed at locations WM-DG-11(A) and WM-DG-13. 5) Clay target fragments observed at locations WM-C-9(A), WM-DG-11(A), WM-DG-13, and EM-10. 6) Proposed Garden Boundaries and Building Complex Based on GPS Coordinate Plan (Fall Creek Engineering, Inc, 2018) and Map of Pogonip Farm & Garden (Homeless Garden Project O&M Plan, 2017). WEST MEADOW SHOOTING PAD LOCATION SOIL SAMPLE LOCATION (RMD, 2020) UNKNOWN CONCRETE PAD APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF SEASONAL WETLAND SOIL SAMPLE LOCATION (EIS, 2019) XRF PROPOSED WEST MEADOW BOUNDARY 50' WETLAND BUFFER (NO PLANTING) 100' WETLAND BUFFER (NATIVE PLANTS) PROPOSED EAST MEADOW BOUNDARY PROPOSED NORTH ORCHARD BOUNDARY APPROXIMATE RAVINE AREA SOIL SAMPLE LOCATION (WHA, 2021) SOIL SAMPLE LOCATION (RMD, 2021) XRF SCREENING LOCATION (RMD, 2021) XRF SCREENING LOCATION (RMD, 2022) SOIL SAMPLE LOCATION (RMD,2022) X-RAY FLUORESCENCE APPROXIMATE AREA EXCEEDING LEAD SCREENING LEVEL FOR UNRESTRICTED LAND USE APPROXIMATE AREA EXCEEDING POLYCYCLIC AROMATIC HYDROCARBON SCREENING LEVELS FOR UNRESTRICTED LAND USE 42.102 TABLES

42.103
Table 1
Lead Concentrations in Soil
Lower Main Meadow, Pogonip Open Space
Santa Cruz, California

Page 1 of 2 ends

Santa Cruz City CouncilJune 28, 2022

Santa Cruz City Council
June 28, 2022