Written Comments — Santa Monica City Council, September 10, 2024

1 David Yakobson
From: Sarah Starks <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 8, 2024 4:23 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Phil Brock; Lana Negrete; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Christine Parra; Oscar de la Torre; Gleam Davis
Subject: Item 8A - Oppose
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Completed

EXTERNAL
Dear City Councilmembers,
I am writing in strong opposition to the proposed ordinance in Item 8A on the City Council Agenda for the September 10 meeting. I oppose the proposed changes to the Municipal Code and support Option 1 in the Staff Report: "Take no action to amend the Municipal Code." I work in mental health services research with a focus on adults with serious mental illness, studying their experiences with public mental health services, homelessness, and the criminal justice system. I'm also a Santa Monica resident since 2004 and a Samohi and JAMS parent.

Efforts to deter homelessness by making it even more uncomfortable and unsafe are ineffective and inhumane. I agree with the September 7 letter from the Santa Monica Democratic Club that the proposed changes are counterproductive, at odds with the city's goals and existing programs to serve unhoused individuals, and pointlessly cruel to individuals who are already experiencing harsh and exposed conditions.

When municipalities pursue aggressive anti-camping policies that prohibit the use of pillows and blankets, they aren't working to address homelessness; they are engaging in a race-to-the-bottom competition with neighboring municipalities to push unhoused individuals across their borders. Please continue to focus on effective approaches to addressing homelessness, including permanent supportive housing, affordable housing, assistance to people at risk of losing their housing, and outreach and services for unhoused individuals.

Sincerely,
Sarah Starks, Santa Monica
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
1 David Yakobson
From: Dan Charn. <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2024 4:54 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Council Mailbox; Clerk Mailbox; Douglas Sloan; David White Subject: ITEM 8-A. IT'S COMPLICATED.

EXTERNAL

NIKKI- PLEASE POST THIS- IT WAS SENT TO YOU LONG BEFORE THE DEADLINE- YOU DIDN'T POST IT - - OR MAYBE YOU POSTED IT IN THE WRONG ITEM AS YOU DID WITH MY COMMENT ABOUT 4-B Blanket and Pillows.. NOT THE REAL ISSUE IS IT?
Taking away a blanket or sleeping bag from a homeless
person is really not the point here is it.. let these people keep their blankets and pillows because let's face it..at the rate we are going ..they really aren't going to get much more ..maybe an apple, a cheese sandwich and some new socks
from Bomba.

Stop wasting money - approving massive buildings and
letting developers and special interest groups like Abundant Housing and YIMBY.. lobby SCAG and Sacramento to
decide what we should have while favoring their developer backers and selling out affordable housing needs while
playing that card with a poker face.

We could have easily housed all 900+ of our homeless
people- some of the same people have asked for housing
for years and been repeatedly denied. We have over 4000 empty units.. house them .. plenty of studios around
..house them.

Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
2 Stop this hypocrisy about caring about their blankets and pillows ..because from the absurdity of the missing tens of millions, to the empty beds at The People Concern, to the refusal to require 25-30% inclusionary to the SMRR/ SMF/ Staff and Planning Dept /Commissions to the total
sellout of this City..to not standing up to SCAG to lower the ridiculous mandated ver 6600 affordable units.. blankets and pillows are totally meaningless.

To act so caring about this issue- to call it "cruel and lacking compassion" is laughable considering the special interest power groups have facilitated the ruin of this town while they have done nothing to stop it and everything to feed it all the time making bad deal after bad deal and telling us how good it is for the community.

This issue has moved us from hypocritical to vulgar. Can I get a witness?
Danielle Charney
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
1 David Yakobson
From: Dan Hall <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2024 11:37 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Phil Brock; Lana Negrete; Gleam Davis; Oscar de la Torre; Christine Parra; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick
Subject: Oppose Item 8A Option 2

EXTERNAL
Mayor Brock, Vice Mayor Negrete, Councilmembers Davis, de la Torre, Parra, Torosis, and Zwick, I am writing in opposition to Item 8A Option 2. Living unhoused, as uncomfortable as that can be for those of us who are privileged to be housed, is not a crime. To prohibit the use of sleeping bags, blankets, pillows, and bedrolls while sleeping is cruel.

Yes – I agree with all of you – not taking action to get folks off of our streets and out of situations that cause them to sleep in our parks is also cruel. Which is why I was proud that the majority of you voted to continue to build permanent supportive housing recently in the face of vocal opposition. The unhoused don't have the same access to power or the luxury of time and the wealth as we housed individuals do and I applaud and thank those of you who courageously voted for those who don't have the ability to speak for themselves.

I encourage you to pursue Option 3, I see no reason to not do an environmental scan. Removal of comfort items is not the answer. As Justices Sotomayor, Kagan, and Brown-Jackson stated in their dissent from the Republican-appointed majority, the Grants Pass decision "leaves the most most vulnerable in our society with an impossible choice. Either stay awake or be arrested." As the Los Angeles County Democratic Party determined last night - in what was an unusually unanimous vote with one voice - Option 2 is "in defiance of Democratic Party values" and is "a needlessly vicious assault on those whom we have already failed and continue to fail." Let our unhoused neighbors keep their pillows, blankets, and bedrolls. Do the compassionate thing.

Oppose Item 8A Option 2.

Dan Hall
Dan Hall for Santa Monica City Council 2024
www.electdanhall.com | @electdanhall
Contribute | Volunteer | Endorse | Subscribe
FPPC ID# 1466499
P.O. Box 3554, Santa Monica, CA 90408
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
2 David Yakobson
From: Mary <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2024 11:12 AM
To: Phil Brock; Lana Negrete; Oscar de la Torre; Christine Parra; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Gleam Davis
Cc: councilmtgitems
Subject: VOTE YES on 8A

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor Brock and City Councilmembers;
I urge you to VOTE YES on Item 8A to modify the existing no camping in public spaces to include these sections of the proposed modification to the current code:
(a) No person shall camp in a prohibited public place.
(b) For the purpose of this Section:
(1) “Camp” means to erect, maintain, or occupy a camp facility for the purpose of living accommodations.
(2) “Camp facility” means the use of, settling, fixing in place, setting up, locating, or leaving behind in a prohibited public place any or a combination of the following: tents, huts, other temporary physical shelters, cots, beds, sleeping bags, or hammocks, or bedrolls.
—
Residents are fed up. We want to feel safe again in our homes, walking in our neighborhoods, visiting our parks, beaches, all public spaces, and our business districts.

We know the vast majority of the homeless population are coming here from other jurisdictions because Santa Monica is so permissive. They can live where they want, do what they want any where in our city’s public spaces. Including in their vehicles outside our homes and schools.

With the recent SCOTUS decision we are already experiencing a significant influx of homeless people here because other cities are listening to their residents and business people. Our local economy is suffering.

Our SMFD and SMPD are expending significant resources and time trying to respond to all the homelessness issues. Police have told us “our hands are tied”.

Thank you for listening to and acting on the safety and quality of life concerns of us residents.

With appreciation,
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
3 Mary Hubbell
Sent from my iPad
Sent from my iPad
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
4 David Yakobson
From: Jason Mastbaum <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2024 11:11 AM
To: Gleam Davis; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Phil Brock; Oscar de la Torre; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra
Cc: councilmtgitems; David White; Douglas Sloan
Subject: 9/10/2024 8A oppose

EXTERNAL
Even if you don't oppose taking blankets from homeless people on basic moral grounds (which you should), and even if you don't care about the city attorney analysis that said taking blankets isn't going to actually achieve anything other than taking away blankets, let's take a moment to consider what happens once we criminalize this. Lots of people take blankets and pillows to our parks to lie out and enjoy the sun and the views. Sometimes, they doze off for a nap. This means that in order to enforce the law, our police will either need to engage in across the board enforcement which is extremely unlikely to be popular with residents, or engage in profiling of who "looks homeless" when deciding whose blanket to seize.

As we know from the data on SMPD traffic stops, this is likely to result in disproportionately targeting people of color. How long is it going to take before that results in SMPD putting the city on the hook for another multimillion dollar settlement?
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
5 David Yakobson
From: Soloff, Michael <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2024 10:56 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: FW: Opposition to Proposed Ordinance under Item 8-A on City Council 9.10.24 Agenda Attachments: Mike Soloff Letter to Council on Item 8-A on City Council 9.10.24 Agenda.pdf

EXTERNAL
Resending with corrected email address.

Michael E. Soloff | Munger, Tolles & Olson LLP
350 South Grand Avenue | Los Angeles, CA 90071
Tel: 213.683.9159 | Fax: 213.683.5159 | [email protected] | www.mto.com From: Soloff, Michael <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2024 10:22 AM
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected].

Subject: Opposition to Proposed Ordinance under Item 8-A on City Council 9.10.24 Agenda Please see the attached letter re Item 8A on tonight’s City Council Agenda Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
September 10, 2024
To: Santa Monica City Council
Re: Item 8-A on 9/10/24 Agenda: Introduction for First Reading an Ordinance Amending Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 4.08.095
Dear Councilmembers:

I am writing to oppose the amendments to the City’s anti-camping ordinance that are set forth under option 2 in the Staff Report for Item 8-A. I do so in my individual capacity as a 32-year Santa Monica resident, in my capacity as Co-Chair of Santa Monicans for Renters’ Rights, in my capacity as the Membership Vice President of the Santa Monica Democratic Club, and in my capacity as an elected member from California Assembly District 51 of the Los Angeles County Democratic Party Central Committee. While SMRR, SMDC, and LACDP all oppose these amendments, this letter sets forth my personal reasons for opposing the proposed changes.

Prior to the Supreme Court’s Grants Pass decision, the law was simple—the City could not criminalize sleeping in public UNLESS there were places where the homeless could safely sleep inside. I wish Santa Monica had adequate places to bring all the homeless inside and could keep public spaces exclusively for public uses. I have worked to help make this happen both during my seven and one-half year service on the Housing Commission, and by leading efforts to pass the 2016 Measure GS and the 2022 Measure GS. But we all know we do not presently have enough such places. So current Santa Monica law—while outlawing encampments—says it is not a crime to sleep with a blanket, pillow or sleeping bag on the street.

In Grants Pass, the three Supreme Court Justices appointed by Democratic Presidents agreed that this should remain the law—that it is cruel and unusual punishment to criminalize sleeping in public when there is no other place for these human beings to sleep. But the Trumpist and other extremist Republican Justices—the same Justices who took away women’s right to choose, gutted the Civil Rights Act, made up a Constitutional right for unregulated individuals to own military grade weapons, and blessed unlimited partisan gerrymandering—now have said the Constitution allows Cities to punish desperate people who have nowhere else to go for doing nothing more than sleeping in public.

Santa Monica need not and should not follow this immoral and misguided extreme right-wing view.

It is misguided because criminalizing sleeping will not solve the homelessness crisis, as studies show. Rather, it will exacerbate the problem. For a detailed discussion of the current state of the evidence, including citations to the available studies, please see Brief Of 57 Social Scientists With Published Research On Homelessness As Amici Curiae In Support Of Respondents in Grants Pass, available at https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/23/23-175/306641/20240403145657027_23- 175%20Amicus%20Brief.pdf.

The majority of Santa Monicans do not want such cruel and ineffective policies enacted in their names. Rather, the majority want our leaders to act as Mayor Bass is acting in Los Angeles by bringing people inside when we have a safe place for them to go.

Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
We in Santa Monica need to do our fair share to solve the regional homelessness problem (as does every other City in the region, as well as the County). This means creating more permanent supportive housing among many other actions. Permanent supportive housing is an evidence-based solution to ending homelessness.

I say create more permanent supportive housing because we already have some such housing at various locations in the City, although many people do not realize it. This is because Santa Monica’s permanent supportive housing has a good track record of being a good neighbor. Indeed, having the formerly homeless living in supportive housing is much safer both for them and for the public than their living on the streets.

The concerns we heard last meeting about proposed supportive housing in Mid-City are the same concerns I heard a decade ago on the Housing Commission when a permanent supportive housing project was going into Sunset Park. I have not heard of those fears coming to pass there or at other similar projects in the City. Instead last I heard good faith on both sides led to good neighbors.

Rather than demonizing all the homeless as criminals, keep in mind that by far the biggest abuser of the children of our community was Eric Uller—a fully housed employee of the Santa Monica Police Department who got away (despite warnings signs per the L.A. Times) with molesting scores of children at the Police Athletic League over a very long period of time. The point: criminality must be dealt with directly, not through group punishment.

I know some of you think—what does he know or care, he lives North of Montana. But the facts are that there is a sober living facility that abuts NOMA and is within five blocks of my home, and that a permanent supportive housing project larger than the proposed Hollywood Housing permanent supportive housing opened in 2007 within two blocks of my then two teenage daughters’ school, and within a block of my primary grocery store. I often see the residents of that project grocery shopping at the same time as I am shopping, and when I do I feel proud that—paraphrasing Jesus’s words— our City is helping the least of these our brethren.

Six years ago my formerly homeless colleague on the Housing Commission said that the City always talks about helping the homeless, but never does much of anything. I thought she made a fair point and together we successfully championed that Parking Structure 3 become affordable housing, including in part supportive housing. Yet here we are six years later and ground has not yet even been broken for that project because five Council members prioritized a project to place $8 million condos on top of the Miramar Hotel as a more urgent project when pandemic staffing cuts purportedly allowed focus on only one project for three years. And now three current Council members apparently tried to eliminate the proposed Hollywood Housing supportive units while at the same time apparently planning to criminalize those who have no safe indoor place to go for sleeping.

Please do not show tonight that my colleague was right that our City’s commitment to compassionately and effectively solving homelessness is just talk. Reject the proposed changes to the anti-camping ordinance and instead press to get more supportive housing built—not just planned (as well as pressing to use GS funds to keep at-risk renters in their homes and to take other compassionate and effective steps toward ending the homelessness crisis).

Michael E. Soloff
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
1 David Yakobson
From: mcsvox <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2024 10:25 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: Phil Brock; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Christine Parra; Oscar de la Torre; Gleam Davis; Caroline Torosis
Subject: LACDP - Santa Monica Municipal Code section 4.08.095 - Oppose change to code Attachments: LACDP - Santa Monica Municipal Code section 4.08.095.pdf

EXTERNAL
Hello Santa Monica City Council,
Please find the attached position letter from the Los Angeles County Democratic Party regarding proposed changes to the Santa Monica Municipal Code regarding "public camping".

Thank you,
Michele Sutter
LACDP Central Committee
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
533 S Fremont Ave Suite 410 • Los Angeles, CA 90071 • www.lacdp.org • [email protected] September 10, 2024
The Honorable Phil Brock
Members of the Santa Monica City Council
Santa Monica, CA 90401
RE: Amending the Santa Monica Municipal Code section 4.08.095 – Prohibition against public camping Dear Mayor Brock and Members of the Santa Monica City Council, The Los Angeles County Democratic Party (LACDP) considers and debates many bills submitted by legislators and organizations, but rarely weighs in on municipal ordinances within the county. However, this proposed amendment to the Santa Monica Municipal code warranted a response from our members, who last night, voted unanimously in opposition to any change to the Santa Monica Municipal code regarding “public camping”.

California and Los Angeles County have often been on the forefront of innovative policies that can at our best, serve as beacons for the nation. The crisis of homelessness nationally, and particularly here in California poses intractable challenges to our communities. And yet, the City of Santa Monica is a laudable example of a city working and succeeding at providing beds and services to its most vulnerable residents.

The possibility that the June 2024 Grants Pass v Johnson ruling by a compromised and corrupted Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) might be embraced and implemented by the City of Santa Monica is as appalling as it is shocking. As Justice Sotomayor, joined by Justices Kagan and Brown-Jackson, wrote in her powerful dissent in Grants Pass, the decision “leaves the most vulnerable in our society with an impossible choice. Either stay awake or be arrested.”
Despite the heartless absurdity of the SCOTUS ruling, homelessness is not a criminal activity. For Santa Monica to decree that it is would not only be in defiance of Democratic Party values, it would be a needlessly vicious assault on those whom we have already failed and continue to fail.

As is often said by Democratic lawmakers and economic justice advocates, “poverty in America is a policy choice.” Our members urge the Santa Monica City Council to develop policies which better reflect our shared humanity.

LACDP is the official governing body of the Democratic Party in the County of Los Angeles and works in cooperation with the State and National Democratic Committees. LACDP is the largest local Democratic Party entity in the United States, representing more than 3.1 million registered Democrats.

If the LACDP can be of assistance, please contact Andrés Molina, LACDP Executive Director, at [email protected] or (562) 351-8410.

Sincerely,
Mark Ramos, Chair
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
1 David Yakobson
From: [email protected]
Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2024 10:51 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: Phil Brock; Lana Negrete; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Christine Parra; Oscar de la Torre; Gleam Davis
Subject: Re: Public Comment - Item 8A - SUPPORT - SM City Council Meeting 9/10/2024

EXTERNAL
Supplemental Statement of Support
Homelessness is not a local issue. If neighboring cities restrict or prohibit camping in public, then that will motivate their homeless to camp out in cities which allow public camping. If neighboring cities allow public camping, then those camping in Santa Monica can move there.

Prohibiting camping in public in Santa Monica is not only necessary for our economy and quality of life, it will motivate churches, charities and individuals to step up and provide housing or camping opportunities in their facilities, in their homes, in their yards and in apartments they pay for. If individual residents do not care enough about the homeless to assist them with their housing, they cannot complain about residents being compelled against their will to house them on sidewalks and other public places. A ban on public camping will be an impetus towards moving towards a solution to the homeless problem. Caroline Torosis, Gleam Davis and Jesse Zwick - open your homes and yards and house one or more homeless persons or rent them an apartment. Put your money where your mouth is.

Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
2 David Yakobson
From: Anastasia Foster <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2024 10:26 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Oppose 8A - take option 1

EXTERNAL
Last night the LA County Democratic Party, the official voice of the Democratic Party, took the unique action of unanimously voting to oppose this local ordinance some of you asked staff to bring back. This issue needs more study before taking such an extreme and unkind measure. Please choose Option 1 to do nothing. Let the STEP Courts and other measures have time to work. I know it can be frustrating to wait, but this is why a deep knowledge of how the government needs to work and how it does work is a great trait in an elected official. There are guardrails and procedures to follow to ensure equity and equal treatment under the law and to protect the City and the People's budget from unnecessary litigation, and staff is letting you know what those are.

Thank you.
--
Anastasia Foster
Facebook
Instagram
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
1 David Yakobson
From: Council Mailbox
Sent: Monday, September 9, 2024 4:13 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: No on 8A
From: Patricia Meyer <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 8, 2024 9:54 AM
To: Phil Brock <[email protected]>; Lana Negrete <[email protected]>; Caroline Torosis <[email protected]>; Jesse Zwick <[email protected]>; Christine Parra <[email protected]>; Oscar de la Torre <[email protected]>; Gleam Davis <[email protected]>; Council Mailbox <[email protected]> Subject: No on 8A

EXTERNAL
As a thirty-year resident of Santa Monica, I have seen homelessness rise exponentially in our neighborhoods. Meanwhile, the V.A. has done an amazing job housing their veterans on their campus.

Of course, it helps to have the space.

I oppose 8A because it will shut down all the positive efforts Santa Monica officials have exerted in trying to solve this difficult problem.

Please continue providing the resources that will amend this pressing issue.

Thank you for your humanity and generosity at this desperate time, Patricia K. Meyer
Writer/Producer
Assistant Professor
Screenwriting
School of Film & Television
Loyola Marymount University
Mobile: (310)968-4044
Website: patriciakmeyerwriter.com
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
2 David Yakobson
From: M K <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 9, 2024 3:34 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: Phil Brock; Lana Negrete; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Christine Parra; Oscar de la Torre; Gleam Davis
Subject: Oppose Item 8A

EXTERNAL
Dear City Councilmembers,
In Santa Monica we care for ALL our community.

I urge you to vote against Item 8A.

Thank you,
Michael Kirschbaum
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
3 David Yakobson
From: Kristen Aster <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2024 9:55 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: John Maceri
Subject: Public Comment: Agenda Item 8A

EXTERNAL
One of Los Angeles County’s largest housing and social services agencies and present in every Service Planning Area (SPA), The People Concern is an expert in connecƟng with people on the streets, bringing them inside and then keeping them inside. 92% of people placed in permanent housing by The People Concern never experience homelessness again.

The People Concern is proud to have worked in the City of Santa Monica for over 60 years.

The People Concern is troubled by the proposed amendments to the City’s current anƟ-camping ordinance. The criminalizaƟon of basic survival acƟviƟes, such as sleeping with protecƟve elements, perpetuates a cycle of poverty and instability, making it even harder for individuals to access the help they need to get back on their feet. We know what works to solve homelessness: housing paired with supporƟve services. We are proud to partner with the County of Los Angeles and the City of Santa Monica on intervenƟons that work to solve, not displace, homelessness, including but not limited to services-led encampment resoluƟon efforts, mulƟ-disciplinary outreach services, low barrier interim housing faciliƟes, housing navigaƟon support to help secure permanent housing, and case management services to retain permanent housing. These intervenƟons work and we urge the City to focus strategies and taxpayer resources on effecƟve soluƟons to ending homelessness.

We oppose this draŌ ordinance and urge the council to vote no on the proposed changes.

Kristen Asterௗௗ
Pronouns: (she/her)ௗ
Director of Public Policy and Advocacyௗ
The People Concernௗ
2116 Arlington Ave. Ste. 100, Los Angeles, CA 90018
ௗ
Phone: (323) 973-0093
ௗ

TPC7000
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
4 David Yakobson
From: Jon Katz <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2024 9:33 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: Phil Brock; Lana Negrete; Gleam Davis; Caroline Torosis; Christine Parra; Oscar de la Torre; Jesse Zwick
Subject: Item 8A - OPPOSE

EXTERNAL
Mayor Brock, Mayor Pro Tempore Negrete, and City Council:

One of the great shortcomings of our American democracy has been the eradication of the Supreme Court over the past several decades into a partisan body. When President Trump appointed three justices, including the replacement of Ruth Bader Ginsburg, it led to a 6-3 MAGA conservative majority which may be with us for quite some time. As such, we are now used to seeing SCOTUS make some extremely disturbing rulings.

This session, the same six justices who recently voted to overturn Roe v. Wade also decided the Grants Pass decision, which is the basis for Item 8A. Please note in the staff report that the City of Santa Monica is currently legally compliant with the Grants Pass decision. No additional action must be taken.

Therefore, any decision made to take further action on this matter would be done so by choice of the City Council.

In her dissent on Grants Pass, Justice Sotomayor wrote, "It is possible to acknowledge and balance the issues facing local governments, the humanity and dignity of homeless people, and our constitutional principles. The City of Grants Pass jails and fines those people for sleeping anywhere in public at any time, including in their cars, if they use as little as a blanket to keep warm or a rolled-up shirt as a pillow.

For people with no access to shelter, that punishes them for being homeless. That is unconscionable and unconstitutional. Punishing people for their status is ‘cruel and unusual’ under the Eighth Amendment.”
It is now time for each Councilmember to decide if they are on the side of Justice Sotomayor, Justice Kagan, and Justice Brown-Jackson; or if they are on the side of the six conservative Supreme Court justices appointed by Republican presidents.

When some of us say there is a conservative majority on Santa Monica City Council, this is why. Please prove me wrong and vote unanimously to take no action on Item 8A. --
Jon Katz | President, Santa Monica Democratic Club
[email protected]
cell: (215) 962-4357
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
5 David Yakobson
From: Caro Vilain <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2024 8:22 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: Council Mailbox; Gleam Davis; Lana Negrete; Oscar de la Torre; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Christine Parra; Phil Brock
Subject: I oppose item 8A

EXTERNAL
Dear council,
As stated when the item first appeared on the agenda, I oppose item 8A.

Recently, I met someone on the streets of our city who has been putting in effort and working with staff to get into housing himself. His words were “It takes time, but I just have to hang in there for now. I can’t wait to be off the street.”
One night a couple weeks ago, he didn’t make into a shelter and had to sleep outside. Because he usually finds a place to sleep at night, he doesn’t carry blankets with him. Yet, when you find yourself sleeping outside on the street, you still have to find a way to stay warm and make it through the night.

He used what he could find, which was a trash bag, filled with recyclable items.

Taking blankets away from those who have them when sleeping on the street won’t help anybody (as shown by the report on the item). It will only make their situation even more miserable than it already is. If you worry about the mental health of our unhoused neighbors, I recommend not making their life more difficult than it already is.

I hope none of you ever find yourselves sleeping on the street, but if you do, I hope we don’t have an ordinance in place that prevents you from having a blanket or a pillow, because you’ll have to figure out a way to stay warm too.

Please oppose item 8A,
Caro Vilain, 90404
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
1 David Yakobson
From: Joan Sekler <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, September 7, 2024 8:00 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Gleam Davis; Oscar de la Torre; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete
Subject: Vote No—Oppose 8A

EXTERNAL
Don’t be cruel—support those working to find housing for the homeless, treatment for the mentally ill, treatment to stop drug and alcohol abuse,etc.

Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
2 David Yakobson
From: Santa Monica Democratic Club <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, September 7, 2024 7:31 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: Phil Brock; Lana Negrete; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Christine Parra; Oscar de la Torre; Gleam Davis
Subject: Item 8A - OPPOSE
Attachments: SMDC Letter to Council 9.10 Meeting Item 8A OPPOSE.pdf

EXTERNAL
Please see attached letter from the Santa Monica Democratic Club Executive Board regarding Item 8A of the September 10, 2024, City Council meeting.

Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
President
Jon Katz
VP Political Action
Derek Devermont
VP Membership
Michael Soloff
VP Programs
Sam Cozolino
VP Communications
Susan Sheu
VP Diversity & Inclusion
Keith Coleman
VP Legislation
Isabel Storey
Treasurer
Luis Barrera Castañón
Recording Secretary
Natalya Zernitskaya
At-Large
Lynn Cervini
Patricia Hoffman
Dolores Sloan
September 7, 2024
Mayor Brock, Mayor Pro Tempore Negrete, and City Councilmembers:

The Santa Monica Democratic Club Executive Committee writes in strong opposition to the proposed ordinance in Item 8A on the City Council Agenda for the September 10 meeting. We oppose the proposed changes to the Municipal Code and support Option 1 in the Staff Report: “Take no action to amend the Municipal Code.” Homelessness is a persistent issue in Santa Monica and surrounding areas – but it’s one on which we’re beginning to make progress with humane, evidence-based solutions. We don’t need to resort to draconian measures such as outlawing pillows and blankets. Our Club strongly believes that criminalizing homelessness is not a solution – the true solution to homelessness is affordable housing.

The west side of Los Angeles County, which includes Santa Monica, saw a nearly 20 percent decrease in the total population of people experiencing homelessness in the past year, according to the Los Angeles County Homeless Services Authority, or LAHSA. In Santa Monica, LAHSA’s Homeless Count showed 774 people experiencing homelessness, a 6 percent decrease from the 826 reported by LAHSA in 2023. “The reduction in people recorded in the county’s 2024 point in time count is promising and reflects the impacts of our strategic efforts to address homelessness,” according to Santa Monica Housing and Human Services Director Heather Averick.

The city continues to push forward and expand its strategic, robust and innovative portfolio of programs and initiatives to address and prevent homelessness, including:
● Working to transition homeless Santa Monicans into interim housing ● Increasing the amount of permanent supportive housing ● Providing housing vouchers to vulnerable Santa Monica individuals and families
● Funding nine homeless outreach teams
P.O. Box 1052 • Santa Monica,CA 90406 • 215-962-4357 • [email protected] Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
● Extending the City Council’s local emergency on homelessness through May 31, 2025
● Developing a citywide Homelessness Strategic Plan which will be presented to the City Council in 2025
By contrast, criminalizing homelessness tends to make the problem worse. Fines, citations, and other negative interactions with law enforcement decrease the likelihood that an individual will engage positively with outreach teams offering services in the future. These same fines and citations can become a barrier to permanent housing, too, if any unpaid tickets end up on someone’s record. This can make it much harder to use a housing voucher or other housing resource. There are many studies and examples of criminalization having no impact on
reducing homelessness – or even crime.

In the mid-2000s, LAPD implemented a program called Safer Cities Initiative (SCI), in which they saturated Skid Row with large numbers of police officers tasked with systematically ticketing unhoused people. SCI resulted in massive numbers of arrests and tickets for people trying to survive on the streets, while its impact on crime was negligible - crime went down in Skid Row during that period at the same rate it went down in other parts of the area not subject to such intensive enforcement. The key takeaway was that criminalization and additional policing of unhoused communities does not impact the crime rates. Human Rights Watch Report, 8/14/241 According to the HRW 2024 Report, convictions for crimes can make it harder for people to come out of homelessness by making it more difficult for them to receive public housing or housing subsidies with a criminal record. Violations as low as infractions can create an insurmountable financial burden upon individuals who already experience financial instability.

Harsh policing of homelessness just creates disorder and instability, while not solving the underlying problem. The 2018 Sparks study of zero tolerance policing in San 2 Francisco found that 70% of the homeless individuals were forced to move by an officer and yet 91% continued to live in open spaces. 74% said they didn’t know of legal spaces to sleep so they moved to nearby areas or surrounding neighborhoods.

Homeless residents reported they felt they were being surveilled and were in fear of being approached by officers. The study found that “by increasing citations and arrests, the homeless collect more debt and once arrested, their criminal histories will make it difficult to access social services, housing, employment, and shelters.” 2 “A Qualitative Study: The Impact of Homelessness Criminalization on Unhoused Individuals Living in Los Angeles,” 2023. https://www.proquest.com/openview/7328f8f5f771fd15ed44b410c0699b05/1?pqorigsite=gscholar&cbl=18750&diss=y 1https://www.hrw.org/report/2024/08/14/you-have-move/cruel-and-ineffective-criminalization-unhoused-people-los-ange les
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
We believe that the humane, evidence-based, and strategic approaches Santa Monica is implementing to solve our homelessness problem are working – and should be continued. It’s not the time to turn to petty and vindictive policies such as snatching away pillows and blankets. This type of enhanced criminalization just leads to emotional distress, financial hardship, a damaging police record – and does little or nothing to reduce crime or get people off the streets.

We urge you to reject the proposed ordinance in Item 8A and adopt Staff Recommendation #1, “Take no action to amend the Municipal Code.” Sincerely,
President, Santa Monica Democratic Club
On Behalf of the Executive Board
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
3 David Yakobson
From: Jacob Wasserman <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, September 6, 2024 2:01 PM
To: Council Mailbox; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems
Subject: Item 8.A: 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 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 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 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 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 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 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 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 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 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 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 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 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 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 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 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 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 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
7 Alan Toy
90402
Sent from my iPad
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 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 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 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 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 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 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 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 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 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 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 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 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 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 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 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 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 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 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 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 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 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 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 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 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 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 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 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 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 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 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 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 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
2 what is best for our city.

Thank you.

Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 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 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
4 Public Health policies supersede our local powers, thereby rendering this request illegal and unenforceable.

Thank you.

Allon
California
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 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 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
2 Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 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 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 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 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 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 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 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

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.

Thanks,
Jacob Wasserman
11th and Washington
90403
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 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 8-A
September 10, 2024
Item 8-A
September 10, 2024

Santa Monica City CouncilSeptember 10, 2024

Santa Monica City Council
September 10, 2024