Written Comments — Santa Monica City Council, August 27, 2024

1 David Yakobson
From: Cynthia Rose <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2024 1:03 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Council Mailbox; Gleam Davis; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Lana Negrete; Oscar de la Torre; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; David White Cc: [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Agenda Item 10D - Opposed
Attachments: 2024-08 CC Agenda item 10D - OPPOSED.pdf

EXTERNAL
Please find our letter in opposition to agenda item 10D Cynthia Rose, Cris Gutierrez and Anya Baroff
--
Cynthia Rose
Co-Chair
Santa Monica Safe Streets Alliance
SaMoSafeStreets.org
I acknowledge with respect and gratitude the Tongva, Kizh, and Chumash Peoples on whose traditional territory I live and work.

Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
Item 10-D
August 27, 2024

August 27, 2024
RE: Agenda Item 10D - Opposed
Dear Mayor and City Council Members:

Santa Monica Safe Streets Alliance opposes the proposed ordinance that criminalizes homelessness and targets our most vulnerable with the abject cruelty of taking warmth and basic comfort from folks without a home by adding the mere existence of “sleeping bags, or bedrolls to the description of an encampment to section 1A and removing section 1D “This ordinance does not prohibit those who are homeless from using sleeping bags, blankets, pillows, and/or bedrolls while sleeping.” from the existing no camping ordinance.

At the same time some council members are also opposing services and supporting housing to provide opportunities for people to get off the streets!
Our City Council must be leaders with intelligence, responsibility and a heart as it solves problems. We urge you to oppose the proposed 10D ordinance and lead responsibly and honorably.

Sincerely,
Cynthia Rose Cris Gutierrez
Co-Chair, Santa Monica Safe Street Alliance Co-Chair, Santa Monica Safe Streets Alliance SaMoSafeStreets.org
Community Human Rights Advocate
The city has requested $515,000 from the Department of Justice to fund the STEP program, which is designed to support supportive housing through STEP court. However, this request is concerning as it coincides with efforts to criminalize homelessness and reduce the supportive housing options it promises in the DOJ proposal. There has been no indication on what supportive housing is offered through this program, how police responses will decrease, or what increases to legal -aid services will be provided to defend those without housing.

This paradoxical approach undermines the intent of the STEP program by potentially exacerbating the very issues it aims to address, creating a situation where the city seeks federal funds for supportive measures while simultaneously enacting local policies that diminish the availability of support for the unhoused population. If not addressed properly the city risks violating the Federal False Claims Act 31 (U.S.C. §§ tel:3729-3733)
*STEP Court -- Shelter, Treatment, and Empowerment Program Court; connecting low-level offenders with necessary services to obtain mental health treatment, addiction treatment, and empowerment program. | Bureau of Justice Assistance https://mayor.lacity.gov/sites/g/files/wph2066/files/2024-01/CIRCLE_FAQ_English_Spanish_Jan%202024.pdf\ Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
1 David Yakobson
From: Daphne Dennis <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2024 5:14 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: Council Mailbox
Subject: Opposition to items 10 D, 16G, and 16J

EXTERNAL
Dear City Council members,
I urge you to reject items 10D, 16G and J on this evening’s agenda. As a 50-year resident of the City, a member of the City’s 1984-85 Homeless Task Force, and a social services professional, I am very aware of the many challenges in the fight to end homelessness. I find the proposed measures ill-advised because they are not solution-oriented and they are heartless. Please support the programs we know are working and build the housing with services we know provides safety and security for both people who were formerly unhoused, and their resident and business neighbors.

Respectfully,
Daphne Dennis
Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
2 David Yakobson
From: Laura Joy <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2024 4:37 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Items 10D, 16G, and 16J: OPPOSED

All three of these proposals run counter to every evidence-based best practice for solving homelessness and will without a doubt make our current crisis worse. And yet most stunning of all is the sheer cruelty of what is being proposed. To simultaneously deny an unhoused person a blanket and an alternative place to sleep is both mean and absurd.

Re: Item 10D, Santa Monica already has an anti-camping ordinance, as well as laws against sitting, lying, and sleeping in doorways, sidewalks, parks, and countless other places. Making it illegal for unhoused people to use a blanket or pillow will not make them disappear. It will simply expose desperate people with nowhere to go to even more inhumane conditions, further jeopardizing their health and safety and quite possibly their lives, as more unhoused people die from cold weather in Los Angeles each year than in New York City.

Re: Item 16G, harm reduction programs are evidence-based best practices that have been continually proven to prevent fatal overdoses, curb the spread of infectious disease, reduce costly ER visits, and connect people to substance-use treatment options. Proposals to eliminate these programs in Santa Monica would lead to more preventable deaths and less opportunities for people to get clean – and, as it stands, state law and County Department of Public Health policies supersede our local powers, thereby rendering this request illegal and unenforceable.

Re: Item 16J, removing all the permanent supportive housing (PSH) from the proposed affordable housing project on city-owned surface parking lots off Wilshire would senselessly deny the housing we so desperately need to get people off our streets. In addition, it will jeopardize the financial viability of the entire project, as competitive state funding for affordable housing strongly prioritizes proposals that include supportive housing for formerly homeless individuals.

I have always trusted that Santa Monica was a compassionate, humane city that believed in science and reason and treated everyone with dignity and respect. Please do not give in to the loudest and most hateful voices in our community. Instead, withdraw these cruel and counterproductive proposals and do what is best for our city.

Laura Joy, 90405
Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
3 David Yakobson
From: John Given <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2024 4:19 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Agenda Items 10D, 16G and 16J

In addition, it will jeopardize the financial
viability of the entire project, as competitive
state funding for affordable housing strongly
prioritizes proposals that include supportive
housing for formerly homeless individuals.

Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
4 I have always trusted that Santa Monica was a
compassionate, humane city that believed in
science and reason and treated everyone with
dignity and respect. Please do not give in to the
loudest and most hateful voices in our
community. Instead, withdraw these cruel and
counterproductive proposals and do what is
best for our city.

John Given
90405

JOHN GIVEN
[email protected]
310-430-1018
Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
5 David Yakobson
From: AlanToy <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2024 2:36 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Council Mailbox; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre Subject: Items 10D, 16G, and 16J: OPPOSED

And yet most stunning of all is the sheer cruelty of what is being proposed. To simultaneously deny an unhoused
person a blanket and an alternative place to sleep is both mean and absurd.Re: Item 10D, Santa Monica already has
an anti-camping ordinance, as well as laws against sitting, lying, and sleeping in doorways, sidewalks, parks, and
countless other places.

Making it illegal for unhoused people to use a blanket or pillow will not make them disappear. It will simply expose desperate people with nowhere to go to even more
inhumane conditions, further jeopardizing their health and safety and quite possibly their lives, as more unhoused Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
6 people die from cold weather in Los Angeles each year than in New York City.

Re: Item 16G, harm reduction programs are evidencebased best practices that have been continually proven to prevent fatal overdoses, curb the spread of infectious
disease, reduce costly ER visits, and connect people to substance-use treatment options. Proposals to eliminate these programs in Santa Monica would lead to more
preventable deaths and less opportunities for people to get clean – and, as it stands, state law and County Department of Public Health policies supersede our local powers,
thereby rendering this request illegal and unenforceable.

Re: Item 16J, removing all the permanent supportive
housing (PSH) from the proposed affordable housing
project on city-owned surface parking lots off Wilshire would senselessly deny the housing we so desperately
need to get people off our streets. In addition, it will jeopardize the financial viability of the entire project, as competitive state funding for affordable housing strongly prioritizes proposals that include supportive housing for formerly homeless individuals.

I have always trusted that Santa Monica was a
compassionate, humane city that believed in science and reason and treated everyone with dignity and respect.

Please do not give in to the loudest and most hateful voices in our community. Instead, withdraw these cruel and
counterproductive proposals and do what is best for our city.

Thank you,
Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
7 Alan Toy
90402
Sent from my iPad
Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
8 David Yakobson
From: Stephen <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2024 2:30 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Council Mailbox; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre Subject: Items 10D, 16G, and 16J: OPPOSED

EXTERNAL
Re: Items 10D, 16G, and 16J: OPPOSED
Dear Santa Monica City Council,
I am a resident of Santa Monica for close to 50 years.

Re: Item 16J, removing all the permanent supportive housing (PSH) from the proposed affordable housing project on city-owned surface parking lots off Wilshire would senselessly deny the housing we so desperately need to get people off our streets. In addition, it will jeopardize the financial viability of the entire project, as competitive state funding for Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
9 affordable housing strongly prioritizes proposals that include supportive housing for formerly homeless individuals.

I have always trusted that Santa Monica was a compassionate, humane city that believed in science and reason and treated everyone with dignity and respect.

Please do not give in to the loudest and most hateful voices in our community. Instead, withdraw these cruel and counterproductive proposals and do what is best for our city.

Stephen Tarzynski, M.D.

Zip code: 90403
Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
10 David Yakobson
From: Melissa Sweeney <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2024 2:22 PM
To: Council Mailbox; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems
Subject: 10D, 16G, and 16J - OPPOSED

EXTERNAL
Councilmembers:

I strongly oppose items, 10D, 16G and 16J.

These proposals would deny unhoused people basic human needs and block access to life-saving services.

The reasons for homelessness are varied – and very well understood. The three proposals disregard the data.

They devalue the work of nonprofits, social scientists, and local volunteers who have striven to develop longterm solutions from the data. 10D, 16G and 16J fail to acknowledge and address existing conditions that the unhoused are compelled to live with.

If I were a cynical member of the community, I might conclude that 10D, 16G and 16J constitute, in aggregate, a transparent, politically motivated effort to eliminate altogether the unhoused from our streets. I hope that is not the case.

In recent years, my local faith community has joined a westside nonprofit to conduct a homeless memorial service, at which the names of scores of unhoused people who have died in our community in the preceding year are read. Their respective hometowns and survivors, if known, have also been noted. The service presents a moving and tragic reality. It underscores the humanity of those who are forced to live – and too often pass away – in our city from lack of basic needs and services. 10D, 16G and 16J represent an affront to core values, faith-based and secular, that most Americans are raised to uphold. The solutions that
10D, 16G and 16J set forth are short-sighted and inhumane. It’s hard to imagine how these proposed measures accomplish anything but shift the unhoused to surrounding communities.

Solving the problem of homelessness is a long process. Impatience and impulsivity should never guide Council decisions. If anything, our City and community should double down on the good work that has already been done, and build upon the efforts we’re presently undertaking. Please shelve these items and work with residents and local businesses to develop additional solutions that track with our principles.

Melissa Sweeney
Santa Monica 90404
Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
11 David Yakobson
From: Vivian Rothstein <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2024 2:14 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Council Mailbox; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre Subject: Item 10D, 16G,and 16J: OPPOSED

EXTERNAL
Dear Santa Monica City Council,
I am a 40 year resident of Sunset Park who raised my children in this city and served as a member of the City Staff. For 10 years I served as Executive Director of the Ocean Park Community Center (now The People Concern) and learned what it takes to end homelessness in our community -- housing that is affordable and supportive services to maintain stability.

And yet most stunning of all is the sheer cruelty of what is being proposed. To simultaneously deny an unhoused person a blanket and an alternative place to sleep is both mean and absurd.

I have always trusted that Santa Monica was a compassionate, humane city that believed in science and reason and treated everyone with dignity and respect.

Please do not give in to the loudest and most hateful voices in our community. Instead, withdraw these cruel and counterproductive proposals and do what is best for our city.

Sincerely, Vivian Rothstein
Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
12 David Yakobson
From: Laila Taslimi <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2024 12:03 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Council Mailbox; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre Subject: Council Agenda items 10D, 16G, and 16J OPPOSED

EXTERNAL
Dear Santa Monica City Council,
I am writing to express my strong opposition to Items 10D, 16G, and 16J, which would deny blankets to those sleeping on our streets, deny proven harm reduction and drug treatment strategies to those struggling to get clean, and deny housing opportunities to those ready to come inside.All three of these proposals run counter to every evidence-based best practice for solving homelessness and will without a doubt make our current crisis worse. And yet most stunning of all is the sheer cruelty of what is being proposed. To simultaneously deny an unhoused person a blanket and an alternative place to sleep is both mean and absurd.Re: Item 10D, Santa Monica already has an anti-camping ordinance, as well as laws against sitting, lying, and sleeping in doorways, sidewalks, parks, and countless other places. Making it illegal for unhoused people to use a blanket or pillow will not make them disappear. It will simply expose desperate people with nowhere to go to even more inhumane conditions, further jeopardizing their health and safety and quite possibly their lives, as more unhoused people die from cold weather in Los Angeles each year than in New York City.Re: Item 16G, harm reduction programs are evidence-based best practices that have been continually proven to prevent fatal overdoses, curb the spread of infectious disease, reduce costly ER visits, and connect people to substance-use treatment options. Proposals to eliminate these programs in Santa Monica would lead to more preventable deaths and less opportunities for people to get clean – and, as it stands, state law and County Department of Public Health policies supersede our local powers, thereby rendering this request illegal and unenforceable.Re: Item 16J, removing all the permanent supportive housing (PSH) from the proposed affordable housing project on city-owned surface parking lots off Wilshire would senselessly deny the housing we so desperately need to get people off our streets. In addition, it will jeopardize the financial viability of the entire project, as competitive state funding for affordable housing strongly prioritizes proposals that include supportive housing for formerly homeless individuals.I have always trusted that Santa Monica was a compassionate, humane city that believed in science and reason and treated everyone with dignity and respect.

Please do not give in to the loudest and most hateful voices in our community. Instead, withdraw these cruel and counterproductive proposals and do what is best for our city.

Sincerely,
Laila Taslimi
resident of 90402
from 긕긖긗긘긙긔긚
Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
1 David Yakobson
From: Kathleen Sheldon <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2024 11:53 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Council Mailbox; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre Subject: Council items on homeless issues in Santa Monica

EXTERNAL
Dear Santa Monica City Council,
I have lived in Santa Monica since 1975, and have seen many attempts to deal with the tragedy of homelessness. The three items currently being raised are not solutions, but will add to the problem. We cannot treat people like this, but we do need some serious responses to make our city better for everyone who lives here.

Re: Item 16J, removing all the permanent supportive housing (PSH) from the proposed affordable housing project on cityowned surface parking lots off Wilshire would senselessly deny the housing we so desperately need to get people off our streets. In addition, it will jeopardize the financial viability of the entire project, as competitive state funding for affordable housing strongly prioritizes proposals that include supportive housing for formerly homeless individuals.

Instead, withdraw these cruel and counterproductive proposals and do what is best for our city.

Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
1 David Yakobson
From: Patricia Meyer <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2024 11:15 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Council Mailbox; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre Subject: Fwd: IMPORTANT: Earlier emails to city council not sending due to Action Network error, please see details here for resending

EXTERNAL
Subject: Items 10D, 16G, and 16J: OPPOSED
Dear Santa Monica City Council,I am writing to express my strong opposition to Items 10D, 16G, and 16J, which would deny blankets to those sleeping on our streets, deny proven harm reduction and drug treatment strategies to those struggling to get clean, and deny housing opportunities to those ready to come inside.All three of these proposals run counter to every evidence-based best practice for solving homelessness and will without a doubt make our current crisis worse. And yet most stunning of all is the sheer cruelty of what is being proposed. To simultaneously deny an unhoused person a blanket and an alternative place to sleep is both mean and absurd.Re: Item 10D, Santa Monica already has an anti-camping ordinance, as well as laws against sitting, lying, and sleeping in doorways, sidewalks, parks, and countless other places. Making it illegal for unhoused people to use a blanket or pillow will not make them disappear. It will simply expose desperate people with nowhere to go to even more inhumane conditions, further jeopardizing their health and safety and quite possibly their lives, as more unhoused people die from cold weather in Los Angeles each year than in New York City.Re: Item 16G, harm reduction programs are evidence-based best practices that have been continually proven to prevent fatal overdoses, curb the spread of infectious disease, reduce costly ER visits, and connect people to substance-use treatment options. Proposals to eliminate these programs in Santa Monica would lead to more preventable deaths and less opportunities for people to get clean – and, as it stands, state law and County Department of Public Health policies supersede our local powers, thereby rendering this request illegal and unenforceable.Re: Item 16J, removing all the permanent supportive housing (PSH) from the proposed affordable housing project on city-owned Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
2 surface parking lots off Wilshire would senselessly deny the housing we so desperately need to get people off our streets. In addition, it will jeopardize the financial viability of the entire project, as competitive state funding for affordable housing strongly prioritizes proposals that include supportive housing for formerly homeless individuals.I have always trusted that Santa Monica was a compassionate, humane city that believed in science and reason and treated everyone with dignity and respect. Please do not give in to the loudest and most hateful voices in our community. Instead, withdraw these cruel and counterproductive proposals and do what is best for our city.

Sincerely,
Patricia K. Meyer
Santa Monica, CA 90405
Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
1 David Yakobson
From: Zack <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2024 11:09 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Council Mailbox; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre Subject: Items 10D, 16G, and 16J: OPPOSED

EXTERNAL
Dear Santa Monica City Council,I am writing to express my strong opposition to Items 10D, 16G, and 16J, which would deny blankets to those sleeping on our streets, deny proven harm reduction and drug treatment strategies to those struggling to get clean, and deny housing opportunities to those ready to come inside.All three of these proposals run counter to every evidence-based best practice for solving homelessness and will without a doubt make our current crisis worse. And yet most stunning of all is the sheer cruelty of what is being proposed. To simultaneously deny an unhoused person a blanket and an alternative place to sleep is both mean and absurd.Re: Item 10D, Santa Monica already has an anti-camping ordinance, as well as laws against sitting, lying, and sleeping in doorways, sidewalks, parks, and countless other places. Making it illegal for unhoused people to use a blanket or pillow will not make them disappear. It will simply expose desperate people with nowhere to go to even more inhumane conditions, further jeopardizing their health and safety and quite possibly their lives, as more unhoused people die from cold weather in Los Angeles each year than in New York City.Re: Item 16G, harm reduction programs are evidence-based best practices that have been continually proven to prevent fatal overdoses, curb the spread of infectious disease, reduce costly ER visits, and connect people to substance-use treatment options. Proposals to eliminate these programs in Santa Monica would lead to more preventable deaths and less opportunities for people to get clean – and, as it stands, state law and County Department of Public Health policies supersede our local powers, thereby rendering this request illegal and unenforceable.Re: Item 16J, removing all the permanent supportive housing (PSH) from the proposed affordable housing project on city-owned surface parking lots off Wilshire would senselessly deny the housing we so desperately need to get people off our streets. In addition, it will jeopardize the financial viability of the entire project, as competitive state funding for affordable housing strongly prioritizes proposals that include supportive housing for formerly homeless individuals.I have always trusted that Santa Monica was a compassionate, humane city that believed in science and reason and treated everyone with dignity and respect. Please do not give in to the loudest and most hateful voices in our community. Instead, withdraw these cruel and counterproductive proposals and do what is best for our city.

Zachary Coil, LCSW
Santa Monica, CA 90405
Sent from my iPhone
Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
1 David Yakobson
From: Anastasia Foster <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2024 11:03 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Council Mailbox; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre Subject: Items 10D, 16G, and 16J: OPPOSED

EXTERNAL
I am opposed to these items. Please don't pass them.
--
Anastasia Foster
Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
2 David Yakobson
From: Megan Kelly <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2024 11:14 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Council Mailbox; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre Subject: Subject: Items 10D, 16G, and 16J: OPPOSED

EXTERNAL
Dear Santa Monica City Council,
Thank you for taking the time to read this email. I am a resident of Santa Monica, a mom, and a nonprofit professional. I care deeply about my neighborhood, city, and community. That's why I was particularly alarmed by some of this evening's agenda.

I am writing to express my strong opposition to Items 10D, 16G, and 16J, which would deny blankets to those sleeping on our streets, deny proven harm reduction and drug treatment strategies to those struggling to get clean, and deny housing opportunities to those ready to come inside.All three of these proposals run counter to every evidence-based best practice for solving homelessness and will without a doubt make our current crisis worse. And yet most stunning of all is the sheer cruelty of what is being proposed. To simultaneously deny an unhoused person a blanket and an alternative place to sleep is both mean and absurd.Re: Item 10D, Santa Monica already has an anti-camping ordinance, as well as laws against sitting, lying, and sleeping in doorways, sidewalks, parks, and countless other places. Making it illegal for unhoused people to use a blanket or pillow will not make them disappear. It will simply expose desperate people with nowhere to go to even more inhumane conditions, further jeopardizing their health and safety and quite possibly their lives, as more unhoused people die from cold weather in Los Angeles each year than in New York City.Re: Item 16G, harm reduction programs are evidence-based best practices that have been continually proven to prevent fatal overdoses, curb the spread of infectious disease, reduce costly ER visits, and connect people to substance-use treatment options. Proposals to eliminate these programs in Santa Monica would lead to more preventable deaths and less opportunities for people to get clean – and, as it stands, state law and County Department of Public Health policies supersede our local powers, thereby rendering this request illegal and unenforceable.Re: Item 16J, removing all the permanent supportive housing (PSH) from the proposed affordable housing project on city-owned surface parking lots off Wilshire would senselessly deny the housing we so desperately need to get people off our streets. In addition, it will jeopardize the financial viability of the entire project, as competitive state funding for affordable housing strongly prioritizes proposals that include supportive housing for formerly homeless individuals.I have always trusted that Santa Monica was a compassionate, humane city that believed in science and reason and treated everyone with dignity and respect. Please do not give in to the loudest and most hateful voices in our community. Instead, withdraw these cruel and counterproductive proposals and do what is best for our city.

My best,
Megan Kelly, 90405
Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
3 David Yakobson
From: Santa Monica Forward <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2024 11:16 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Council Mailbox; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre Subject: City Council Items 10D, 16G, and 16J:

EXTERNAL
To help
protect your
privacy,
Micro so ft
Office
prevented
auto matic
download of
this picture
from the
Internet.

Dear Santa Monica City Council,
We are writing to express our strong opposition to Items 10D, 16G, and 16J, which would deny blankets to those sleeping on our streets, deny proven harm reduction and drug treatment strategies to those struggling to get clean, and deny housing opportunities to those ready to come inside.All three of these proposals run counter to every evidence-based best practice for solving homelessness and will without a doubt make our current crisis worse. And yet most stunning of all is the sheer cruelty of what is being proposed. To simultaneously deny an unhoused person a blanket and an alternative place to sleep is both mean and absurd.

Re: Item 16G, harm reduction programs are evidence-based best practices that have been continually proven to prevent fatal overdoses, curb the spread of infectious disease, reduce Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
4 costly ER visits, and connect people to substance-use treatment options. Proposals to eliminate these programs in Santa Monica would lead to more preventable deaths and less opportunities for people to get clean – and, as it stands, state law and County Department of Public Health policies supersede our local powers, thereby rendering this request illegal and unenforceable.

Please do not give in to the loudest and most hateful voices in our community. Instead, withdraw these cruel and counterproductive proposals and do what is best for our city. - Santa Monica Forward
Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
5 David Yakobson
From: Council Mailbox
Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2024 11:31 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: Items 10D, 16G, and 16J: OPPOSED
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
From: Dana Borowka <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2024 11:21 AM
To: Council Mailbox <[email protected]>
Subject: Items 10D, 16G, and 16J: OPPOSED

Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
6 I have always trusted that Santa Monica was a compassionate, humane city that believed in science and reason and treated everyone with dignity and respect. Please do not give in to the loudest and most hateful voices in our community. Instead, withdraw these cruel and counterproductive proposals and do what is best for our city.

Dana and Ellen Borowka
90403
Have a great week!
Talk to you soon,
Dana
Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
1 David Yakobson
From: Jason Mastbaum <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2024 10:27 AM
To: Phil Brock; Oscar de la Torre; Gleam Davis; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; councilmtgitems
Subject: City Council Items 10D, 16G, and 16J: OPPOSE
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor Brock Mayor Pro Tempore Negrete, and members of the Santa Monica City I am writing to express my strong opposition to Items 10D, 16G, and 16J, which would deny blankets to those sleeping on our streets, deny proven harm reduction and drug treatment strategies to those struggling to get clean, and deny housing opportunities to those ready to come inside.

I have always believed that Santa Monica was a compassionate, humane city that believed in science and reason and treated everyone with dignity and respect. Please do not give in to the loudest and most hateful voices in our community. Instead, withdraw these cruel and counterproductive proposals and do Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
2 what is best for our city.

Thank you.

Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
3 David Yakobson
From: Allon Percus <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2024 9:51 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: City Council Items 10D, 16G, and 16J: OPPOSE
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged

EXTERNAL
Council Comments ,
Dear Mayor Brock Mayor Pro Tempore Negrete, and members of the Santa Monica City I am writing to express my strong opposition to Items 10D, 16G, and 16J, which would deny blankets to those sleeping on our streets, deny proven harm reduction and drug treatment strategies to those struggling to get clean, and deny housing opportunities to those ready to come inside.

Re: Item 16G, harm reduction programs are evidence-based best practices that have been continually proven to prevent fatal overdoses, curb the spread of infectious disease, reduce costly ER visits, and connect people to substance-use treatment options. Proposals to eliminate these programs in Santa Monica would lead to more preventable deaths and less opportunities for people to get clean – and, as it stands, state law and County Department of Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
4 Public Health policies supersede our local powers, thereby rendering this request illegal and unenforceable.

Thank you.

Allon
California
Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
1 David Yakobson
From: Steven Johnson <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, August 26, 2024 5:08 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Lana Negrete; Caroline Torosis; Christine Parra; Gleam Davis; Oscar de la Torre
Cc: Andrew Gomez; Maryanne LaGuardia; John Smith; Ann Bowman; Lori Brown; Greg Morena
Subject: August 27, 2024 Council Meeting - Item 10.D - SUPPORT with comment Attachments: campfire-in-library-park.MOV

EXTERNAL
Dear Council Members,
I am writing in support of advancing Item 10.D to improve our anti-camping ordinance in Santa Monica.

As a member of the Recreation & Parks Commission, I regularly visit our neighborhood parks and often see large settlements crop up for the day and sometimes overnight. Lacking a tent, I'm afraid some of these settlements do not rise to the definition of "camping" in the ordinance, but any common sense observation would see that these set-ups are quite extensive, encroach public space and frequently discourage other park visitors.

As an example, pictured below is a fairly extensive encampment that remained in place at Ocean Park Library for several days not too long ago. I attach video, as well, to show that at night, the location even featured a campfire.

Thank you again for your consideration of this ordinance update, and I ask that you remain open to further improvements and enforcement in the future.
* * * * * * * * * *
Steven Johnson
Chair, Recreation & Parks Commission
Resident, Sunset Park
Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
2 Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
1 David Yakobson
From: Caro Vilain <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, August 26, 2024 10:45 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Council Mailbox; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre Subject: I oppose item 10D

EXTERNAL
Dear Council,
I strongly oppose item 10D. I’m ashamed to see my city treat people experiencing homelessness like they aren’t human beings. We must tackle the root of the issue rather than attack the victims of the problems we are exacerbating by not building enough housing quickly enough.

For anyone who will be voting on this item but didn’t take the time to read the report, here is a paragraph from it:
"The decision does not legally require the City to do anything differently, either in legislation or practices.

There are many legal, resource, and reality considerations. The decision will not eliminate homelessness, but there are some nuanced changes that could be initiated.

Even if sleeping on public property could be completely outlawed, it will not end. Even if it is legally prohibited, resources must be available and there must be the will to cite or arrest, prosecute, then despite zero bail and even if a case makes it to court and the defendant appears, and a jury were to convict, there certainly are not resources nor the will to hold those convicted of low level crimes such as sleeping in public in the County jail. Until there are substantially greater resources available for mental health treatment, substance abuse prevention and treatment, and housing (shelter, transitional, and/or permanent housing), as people necessarily must sleep somewhere, the issue will not be resolved by this Court decision."
Please oppose item 10D, treat all people with dignity, and provide them with resources, which some of you don’t seem interested in doing since some of the 16 items on this agenda do exactly the opposite.

Caro Vilain, 90404
Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
2 David Yakobson
From: Dustin Shahan <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, August 26, 2024 9:48 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Council Mailbox; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre Subject: 10D: oppose changes to municipal code

EXTERNAL
Good evening,
Please oppose the changes to the municipal code outlines in option 2. Attempting to treat the symptom of the homeless crisis through heartless action will not yield any benefits.

Either option 1 or 3 should be taken to allow the city to develop a plan to truly address this crisis in an effective, compassionate, and legal way.

Thanks
Dustin Shahan
90401
Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
3 David Yakobson
From: Brian Sweeney <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, August 26, 2024 9:19 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Item 10D: Support for Option 1

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor Brock and honorable City Council members,
I'm writing in support of Option 1 for Item10D. While I understand the community's frustration around homelessness and the myriad public safety posed by the housing crisis, we already have a robust and enforced anti-camping ordinance (and for anyone who doubts its enforcement, I invite them to take a look at the difference between the Santa Monica and Los Angeles side of Centinela under the 405).

And in that context, I simply do not understand how an additional ban on blankets and bedrolls is going to make a difference re: public safety. Since we're unlikely to have the resources to enforce it against all, it will likely only be enforced against those who are already having other serious problems-and if that's the case, I truly doubt the absence/presence of a blanket/bedroll is going to make the difference as to whether or not PD (or the City) is able to take some enforcement action against any particular individual.

As the City Attorney writes, "Even if sleeping on public property could be completely outlawed, it will not end....current laws do not allow people to be forced to accept shelter, and people can decline to accept shelter." Since that's the case, and thus people will be sleeping outside anyway, why take away people's blankets--frankly, as it gets colder at night, putting them at risk for all sorts of health issues (including possible death)--when it's not going to have an impact on public safety or PD's ability to do their jobs?
I do think our homelessness crisis poses serious public safety risks for both housed and unhoused individuals--but a blanket ban is not the way to ameliorate those issues.

Thank you,
Brian Sweeney
Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
4 David Yakobson
From: Jacob Wasserman <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, August 26, 2024 8:55 PM
To: Council Mailbox; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems
Subject: Item 10.D: Against Criminalizing Our Unhoused Neighbors

EXTERNAL
Dear Santa Monica City Council,
As a voter, resident, and parent, I oppose the proposed ordinance in Item 10.D. The ordinance proposes is cruel, and it saddens me deeply to see our welcoming City contemplate a both literal and figurative blanket ban.

The ordinance would criminalize people with no other place to go, for merely seeking shelter when they otherwise lack anywhere else safe to sleep. It does nothing to solve homelessness, merely forcibly pushing people from place to place. It wastes our tax dollars while accomplishing very little.

Legal scholars have argued that such ordinances violate basic human rights. The crisis requires far more beds and shelter space than we have available.

I would hate to see the City side with the conservative wing of the Supreme Court here.

Having had unhoused people take shelter in my car ports before, and living myself just next door to a residence housing the formly unhoused, I know that compassion is needed and that our unhoused neighbors simply want a home first and foremost. This proposal is the exact opposite.

Thanks,
Jacob Wasserman
11th and Washington
90403
Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
1 David Yakobson
From: Peter DiChellis <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, August 23, 2024 2:26 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: ITEM 10 D Camping in Public Places

EXTERNAL
I strongly support expanding this prohibition despite the City Attorney all but promising his office will refuse to prosecute a valid and enforceable law, in defiance of any Council decision on the matter.

Time for a new City Attorney? The answer is almost certainly “yes” because Santa Monica needs a dramatic turnaround in its long-failed stance on homelessness, and passive-aggressive bureaucrats should not be allowed to stand in the way.

Sincerely,
Peter DiChellis
Santa Monica
Item 10-D
August 27, 2024
Item 10-D
August 27, 2024

Santa Monica City CouncilAugust 27, 2024

Santa Monica City Council
August 27, 2024