From: Melanie Dodson
To: City Council Public Comments
Cc: Lara Magnusdottir; Marketing
Subject: [EXTERNAL] 4Cs - Child Care - Priority Setting Date: Tuesday, January 30, 2024 5:24:14 PM
Mayor Rogers and Council Members –
Thank you for the opportunity to make public comment regarding your upcoming priority setting. I had hoped to come in person, but schedules did not allow. I was happy to see child care in the Federal Legislative Platform this past week.
I am always appreciative of the Council’s historical and long-term partnership, leadership and understanding of the key role that Early Care & Education has on our families and our employers in the City of Santa Rosa. Parents Earning while Children are learning. 4Cs as you know, is your local state funded Child Care Resource & Referral Agency and we urge you to maintain Child Care & Early Learning as one of your highest priorities – it is essential.
Since the devastating impact of fires and COVID on our community and the severe loss of early care providers, facilities, and overall slots it is imperative that we continue to work together to find ways to sustain and expand access to slots for children birth through 12 years for all of our families.
Although we have seen a return of the number of facilities providing care in Santa Rosa since COVID, and an increased investment and access to child care subsidies, the overall number of slots provided continues to be greatly reduced – we are still showing a loss of 30% of previously existing child care slots. This is due to smaller programs opening, reduced slots at larger centers due to lack of staff and the industry shift to serve younger children with the expansion of transitional kindergarten. 4Cs maintains a waitlist of near 1000 children waiting for access and support for child care.
Your leadership is essential as we work towards retaining existing facilities and to build more capacity (open more programs). You have played critical roles over the last 3-5 years in all of the following: colocating child care within housing developments, ensuring no barriers to open child care programs within permitting processes, investing in the Child Care Initiative Project supporting the small business development of licensed family child care providers, child care facilities grants, being a thought partner and leader in the vision for Employer Supported Child Care, through Violence Prevention Partnership ensuring at risk families have immediate access and enhanced case management for child care and strategic partnerships to deliver services in city owned facilities like the 4Cs Willow Creek Preschool at North West Community Park and Franklin Park Co Op Preschool to name a few. Please support and continue these efforts.
Next to housing, child care for families is one of the most significant out of pocket expenses - where cost of full time care for a child age birth to three can average $2000 per month and is rising. If you add aftercare for your school age child there is additional $500 plus per month.
Again thank you for your ongoing partnership and I look forward to continue working with you all on solving our child care and early education needs for all families in Santa Rosa.
Melanie
Melanie Dodson
Executive Director
707.522.1413 x130
Sonoma4cs.org
4Cs Mission is to provide access to quality child care and early education in Sonoma County through advocacy, direct service and empowerment.
Community~Inclusivity~Education~Advocacy~Collboration~Respect~Opportunity NOTICE OF CONFIDENTIALITY: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential or exempt from disclosure under applicable laws. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited and may be a violation of law. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and delete all copies of the original message. Thank you!
From: Thea Hensel
To: _CityCouncilListPublic
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Greenway as a Priority Goal
Date: Friday, February 2, 2024 10:08:00 AM
[email protected] appears similar to someone who previously sent you email, but may not be that person. Learn why this could be a risk
Dear Council member,
By Summer 2024 the City of Santa Rosa will acquire the property known as the Southeast Greenway.
I would like you to place the Greenway in a Priority Goal category to give Parks staff the time to work on the following:
work with the City Attorney for public access
plan for the safety of citizens in this interim process prior to development develop a mechanism for Parks Dept. to receive donations from grants, foundations and individuals for maintenance, planning and development.
Sonoma Land Trust and the Greenway Campaign have already begun to solicit funding for this project and plan to work with the City to see the vision through the final process.
Thank you for your consideration.
Regards,
Thea Hensel
Chair, SOutheast Greenway Campaign
From: Cadance H. Allinson
To: City Council Public Comments
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Comment - Council Priority Setting, February 6 Date: Friday, February 2, 2024 1:34:25 PM
Mayor Rogers, Vice Mayor Stapp and Members of Council,
I would like to acknowledge the hard work of City staff and your dedication as councilmembers, that have helped to make an impact for our Downtown community over the past few years. The additional members of the DET, the constant allocation of resources to support our unsheltered population and the progress of the EIFD and Downtown park projects, have all contributed to a positive shift for Downtown District – helping our downtown grow into a vibrant, welcoming community center that drives the economy and local development.
As you discuss your priorities for the upcoming year, I urge you to consider inclusion of the following initiatives which will help build on the positive momentum we’ve created together:
1. Implement a multi-item policy that aids retention and expansion of downtown employment including revisions to sign policies, improved tenant improvement permit review, review and revision of employee parking options and a suspension of business license fees. We also look forward to seeing the final draft of the Vacant Property Ordinance.
2. Conduct a thorough review of the existing Downtown parking strategy, program and assets, with feedback from Downtown community
3. Dedicate resources to address safety issues originating at the Transit Mall to ensure public transportation remains safe for all members of the community
4. Consider allocation of Assistant City Attorney time to address ordinance/code violation and misdemeanor enforcement
5. Improve the safety and attraction of Downtown core with enhanced pedestrian level lighting and replacement of existing vehicle lane lighting
Thank you for your support on these critical items. The DAO looks forward to continuing our strong partnership to meet the needs of our downtown businesses and our entire community.
Thank you,
Cadance
CADANCE HINKLE ALLINSON | Santa Rosa Downtown District, Executive Director 50 Old Courthouse Square, Suite 110, Santa Rosa, CA 95404 P 707-636-2845 | F 707-545-6914
DOWNTOWNSANTAROSA.ORG
From: steve rabinowitsh
To: City Council Public Comments
Subject: [EXTERNAL] GOAL SETTING
Date: Sunday, February 4, 2024 1:50:35 PM
Dear Mayor Rogers and City Council Members:
The Prince Memorial Greenway is a very important creek and open space area for our community. It serves as an important asset for our water quality, habitat for steelhead and coho salmon and other species, and is an important connection for our bike and pedestrian paths in our community, It is also a critical link between downtown and Railroad Square. A group has formed to help maintain and improve the Greenway and to work with the City on this effort. The group-the Friends of the Prince Memorial Greenway- includes neighbors, representatives from the Railroad Square Association, numerous community volunteers and bike organizations. Goals include better maintenance, upgrades and to increase activity through more events, public art and improved security. It should be a goal that “The City Parks and other departments will work with community volunteers to help maintain and improve the Prince Memorial Greenway.” We would encourage the City to include more funding for the Parks Department for this purpose. The Creek Stewardship program is also very important in these efforts. We need to have the City as an active partner to help maintain and upgrade the Greenway.
Thank you, Steve Rabinowitsh
From: Betty Zootis
To: City Council Public Comments
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Safe Schools NOW!
Date: Sunday, February 4, 2024 5:28:13 PM
Please put our children’s safety before your political ambitions! Safe schools will advance your career! PLEASE! Sent from my iPhone
From: Dianne Monroe
To: City Council Public Comments
Subject: [EXTERNAL] GOAL SETTING (Affordable Senior MHP Housing) Date: Sunday, February 4, 2024 8:30:59 PM
Dear City Council,
I’m writing, as someone who lives in a Santa Rosa Senior MHP, to implore you to protect Senior Mobile Home residents, as part of your Goal Setting process. I ask that you do this by creating an overlay zone to preserve Senior MHPs as Senior MHPs and reduce the in-place transfer fee from 10% to 5%.
There is a detailed fact package, available upon request from Tom LaPenna, ([email protected]
) that documents the bigger picture of the crisis some
corporate owners are forcing upon elderly residents and why this is so important. I urge each of you to request it and read it.
This package, Connecting the Dots
, documents that:
1. Corporations are making huge profits by buying older mobile home parks, raising space rents and pushing longtime residents out.
2. Some corporations are more aggressive and unscrupulous in doing this.
3. Harmony Communities (owner of Carriage Court in Santa Rosa and also Little Woods in Petaluma and Countryside in Petaluma) is among the most egregious in their actions.
This comes at a time when:
4. We face a crisis in Senior affordable housing (and all affordable housing) locally and nationally, while at the same time that Social Security has not kept up with inflation and pensions have become a thing of the past.
5. As a result of the above factors:
A. Older adults are the fastest growing age group of the homeless population in California.
B. People over age 50 now account for approximately half of the unhoused population in the US.
C. Over the next decade, the number of elderly homeless Americans is projected to triple.
To dig deeper (and perhaps uncover “The Smoking Gun”):
A 2021 NPR story:
Why are Investors Buying Up Mobile Home Parks and Evicting Residents? https://www.npr.org/2021/09/03/1033910731/why-are-investors-buying-up-mobile- home-parks-and-evicting-residents
This story explains how a company raises space rent rates and this makes the park more valuable. They then borrow more money against the increased value of the park and use that money to go buy another mobile home park. They do this again and again.
To me, this seems like a Ponzi scheme by the rich to engorge themselves further that results in driving Senior Citizens into homelessness in the last years of their lives, while depriving them of their most valuable possession – their home.
I implore you to protect Senior mobile home park residents (and prevent Senior homelessness) by creating overlay zones and reducing the in-place transfer fee.
Thank you,
Dianne Monroe
From: Khara Tapia
To: City Council Public Comments
Subject: [EXTERNAL] GOAL SETTING
Date: Monday, February 5, 2024 6:07:47 AM
Hi, I’m writing to express my support for funding the SRPD Gang Crimes Task Force, and the
Violence Prevention Partnership program.
I have a daughter at Slater middle school, and another that will start in two years. I have attended the schools as a child as well. Our schools need more support and the city needs more support managing gang violence in Santa Rosa. Our students are suffering because this has gone unchecked.
I urge you to strongly support this and dedicate funds accordingly.
Thank you,
Khara Tapia
Manager, Kaiser Permanente and concerned mom
From: Nicole Malone
To: City Council Public Comments
Subject: [EXTERNAL] GOAL SETTING
Date: Monday, February 5, 2024 7:27:00 AM
Hello everyone,
Thank you for allowing emails as public comment for Tuesday's meeting as I will unfortunately be unable to attend.
I’ll keep this short as I’m certain the city is very aware of the need for safety in our schools.
We need supervision
and feel that a first responder would be the best type of supervision to bring back to our campuses.
Please consider, for the safety of our city’s children, a budget for a pilot SRO program for all the city’s middle and high schools.
Their lives depend on it. And you can help.
Sincere thanks to all,
Nicole Malone
From: JAMES MCADLER
To: CityCouncilListPublic
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Request to include Southeast Greenway as a 2024-25 City Priority Date: Monday, February 5, 2024 9:23:00 AM
Dear Mayor Rogers and Members of City Council,
As citizens of our fair City, we respectfully request that the Santa Rosa Southeast Greenway be included in the City's priority goals for the upcoming fiscal year 2024-
25. Having the Greenway as a priority goal will allow City staff to devote time to this important transition period and to prepare for the Greenway's planning process and eventual development.
Thank you for your consideration and for your service to our community.
Jim and Sandy McAdler
Santa Rosa, CA 95405
From: Scott Kincaid
To: City Council Public Comments
Subject: [EXTERNAL] GOAL SETTING
Date: Monday, February 5, 2024 9:23:14 AM
Mayor Natalie Rogers and Council Members,
I have been encouraged by the increased investment in Public Safety and would like to see it remain as a high priority. The addition of the Downtown Enforcement Team along with the Gang Task Force are two prime examples. Our family has extremely appreciated the City’s support in reinvigorating a School Resource Officer program within our City’s High Schools and Middle Schools!
We would like to see a priority established to plan for and fund the implementation of that program.
The inRESPONSE Mental Health Support Team has shown incredible potential and should be considered for expansion.
Thank you for your leadership!
Respectfully,
Scott Kincaid
City of Santa Rosa Resident
Scott Kincaid
Owner | Project Manager
Facility Development Company
5329 Skylane Blvd.
Santa Rosa, CA. 95403
www.fdc-comp.com
[email protected]
707 523 1722 Ex. 3
707 523-1745 Direct
707 526 4980 Fax
707 495 7058 Cell
CL# 762651
“Commercial, Industrial, Residential & Design Build Construction Services”
This and any attached documents are for the use of the intended recipient(s) only and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, or work product that may be exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication and any attachments is strictly prohibited, and you are hereby requested to delete this message and any attached documents, to destroy any printed copies, and to telephone or otherwise contact the sender immediately about the error.
From: Stephanie Taylor
To: City Council Public Comments
Subject: [EXTERNAL] GOAL SETTING
Date: Monday, February 5, 2024 9:48:05 AM
Hello Mayor Rogers, City Manager Smith, and City Council Members, As a concerned resident and advocate for community safety, I am writing to request your support in prioritizing city safety programs and school campus safety in the upcoming annual city budget.
Ensuring the safety of our community members, especially our children, should be a top priority for our city. By allocating sufficient funds to city safety programs and enhancing security measures on school campuses, we can create a safer and more secure environment for everyone.
City safety programs play a crucial role in maintaining a secure environment for everyone. Allocating sufficient funds to initiatives will enhance the overall safety infrastructure. These programs foster collaboration between law enforcement, city leaders and citizens, creating a proactive approach to crime prevention and rapid response.
City Safety Programs: Our City safety programs play a crucial role in crime prevention, emergency response, and overall community well-being. Allocating additional resources to these programs will enable law enforcement and emergency services to better address and mitigate potential threats.
School Campus Safety: The safety of our students and educators is paramount, and essential to our community. Enhancing security measures on school campuses is necessary to provide a secure learning environment in our community. We cannot continue to function in this environment as in the past year we have not seen improvement in campus safety. In fact, our school campuses are a target for criminal activity due to the lack of safety measures in place.
I understand that budget decisions require careful consideration, and there are many competing needs for limited resources. However, I believe that given our current climate of crisis around safety in our community and particularly on school campuses that this is an investment in our collective future.
I urge you to champion this cause during budget deliberations and advocate for the necessary funding to bolster city safety programs and school campus safety.
Together, we can make our city a safer place for all residents.
Thank you very much for your tireless time and effort around this very urgent matter in our city.
Sincerely,
Stephanie Taylor
From: [email protected]
To: City Council Public Comments
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Goal Setting
Date: Monday, February 5, 2024 9:50:55 AM
Santa Rosa City Council,
Please prioritize funding for School Resource Officers and campus safety through the SRPD and/or the SR Violence Prevention.
Carefully selected, specifically trained, and properly equipped school resource officers are an essential part of school safety.
Santa Rosa students and families need the city's partnership with our school district.
Sincerely,
Sheila Walker
From: Reid Stinnett
To: CMOffice; _CityCouncilListPublic
Cc: Thea Hensel; Linda Proulx
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Southeast Greenway Support Letter
Date: Monday, February 5, 2024 10:30:20 AM
Attachments: Feb 5 2024 letter to SR City Council on behalf of SEG.docx Dear City Officials:
Please see attached letter in support of the SE Greenway being included in the City Priority Goals for the upcoming year.
Sincerely,
Reid Stinnett
707-481-1695
Reid Stinnett
Santa Rosa, CA 95405
February 5, 2024
To Whom It May Concern:
I am writing to encourage you to include the Southeast Greenway project in the City Priority Goals for the upcoming year, 2024-25.
As you know, the City of Santa Rosa will be taking possession of the 47-acre parcel called “the Greenway” from CalTrans within a matter of months. The Southeast Greenway committee has begun fundraising for the important planning process and city staff will need time to collaborate with the Sonoma Land Trust and others to move the project forward in an expeditious manner. The project has been a long and sometimes arduous one thus far, and is at an important inflection point where there is great momentum!
Having the Greenway as a priority will allow staff to devote time to this important effort!
Thank you very much for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Reid Stinnett
From: Lisa Krisl
To: City Council Public Comments
Subject: [EXTERNAL] City budget
Date: Monday, February 5, 2024 11:16:34 AM
Hello everyone,
Thank you for accepting public comment emails in regards to the city budget.
As you are aware, our city is seeing an increase in gang activity and violence. Our schools are dealing with weekly violent acts on campuses. We need supervision and feel that a first responder would be the best type of supervision to bring back to our campuses.
Please consider, for the safety of our city’s children, a budget for a pilot SRO program for all the city’s middle and high schools.
We can’t wait on this anymore, please help.
Sincerely,
Lisa krisl
From: [email protected]
To: City Council Public Comments
Subject: [EXTERNAL] GOAL SETTING
Date: Monday, February 5, 2024 11:26:28 AM
Hello Mayor Rogers, City Manager Smith, and City Council Members, After yet another dangerous ”incident” on an SRCS campus this morning, I feel compelled to write to you.
I am a concerned resident, a teacher at Yulupa Elementary, a parent of a Montgomery High School student, the wife of a Montgomery HighSchool teacher, and an advocate for community safety.
I am writing to request your support
in prioritizing city safety programs and school campus safety in the upcoming annual city budget.
Ensuring the safety of our community members, especially our children, should be a top priority for our city. By allocating sufficient funds to city safety programs and enhancing security measures on school campuses, we can create a safer and more secure environment for everyone.
City safety programs play a crucial role in maintaining a secure environment for everyone. Allocating sufficient funds to initiatives will enhance the overall safety infrastructure. These programs foster collaboration between law enforcement, city leaders and citizens, creating a proactive approach to crime prevention and rapid response.
City Safety Programs: Our City safety programs play a crucial role in crime prevention, emergency response, and overall community well-being. Allocating additional resources to these programs will enable law enforcement and emergency services to better address and mitigate potential threats.
School Campus Safety: The safety of our students and educators is paramount, and essential to our community.
Enhancing security measures on school campuses is necessary to provide a secure learning environment in our community. We cannot continue to function in this environment as in the past year we have not seen improvement in campus safety. In fact, our school campuses are a target for criminal activity due to the lack of safety measures in place.
I understand that budget decisions require careful consideration, and there are many competing needs for limited resources. However, I believe that given our current climate of crisis around safety in our community and particularly on school campuses that this is an investment in our collective future.
I urge you to champion this cause during budget deliberations and advocate for the necessary funding to bolster city safety programs and school campus safety. Together, we can make our city a safer place for all residents.
Thank you very much for your tireless time and effort around this very urgent matter in our city.
Sincerely,
Lisa Bellone
Sent from my iPhone
From: Sarah Jenkins
To: City Council Public Comments
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Budget meeting
Date: Monday, February 5, 2024 11:30:57 AM
Hello, and thank you for allowing public connect via email. Please do anything in your financial power to reinstate the SRO program at Santa Rosa city schools. The school board and board president should not hold such power including the safety of our children in their hands without oversight. The city needs to step in with whatever legal measures are appropriate. The highschools. Especially Montgomery NEED an officer on campus.
Thank you
~Sarah Jenkins
From: Jennifer Vargas
To: City Council Public Comments
Subject: [EXTERNAL]
Date: Monday, February 5, 2024 11:38:39 AM
All,
Thank you for allowing emails as public comment for Tuesday's meeting as I will be unable to attend due to work.
As I’m sure everyone is aware of the most recent incident with a non-Montgomery high school student showing up on campus today with a ski mask and a knife …I’m certain the city is very aware of the need for safety in our schools. We need supervision and feel that a first responder would be the best type of supervision to bring back to our campuses.
Please consider, for the safety of our city’s children, a budget for a pilot SRO program for all the city’s middle and high schools. Their lives depend on it. And you can help.
Thanks to all,
Jennifer N. Vargas
Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
From: Eris Weaver
To: City Council Public Comments
Subject: [EXTERNAL] GOAL SETTING
Date: Monday, February 5, 2024 11:41:53 AM
Attachments: image002.png
image003.png
Dear Mayor and Councilmembers:
As you plan your goals for the City for 2024, I urge you to do so with your previously stated values in mind.
Santa Rosa’s Vision 2030 states:
Imagine a city defined by a vibrant downtown, thriving neighborhoods, a multi-cultural community, and breathtaking stretches of open space, creeks, and greenbelts.
In 2020, the City passed Climate Emergency Resolution, including ambitious greenhouse gas emissions goals.
In 2022, a Vision Zero action plan was approved to reduce traffic fatalities.
In order to meet all of these lofty goals, the City MUST prioritize active transportation over individual motor vehicles; prioritize protected bikeways over painted lanes; and build out a network of low-stress routes so that residents and visitors alike may safely, comfortably, and happily travel about the City on foot, bike, or transit.
Thank you for your consideration.
Eris Weaver, Executive Director
Sonoma County Bicycle Coalition
[email protected]
707-545-0153 office • 707-338-8589 cell
www.bikesonoma.org
Book time to meet with me
I’m riding 120 miles to raise money
for SCBC – DONATE HERE
February 5, 2024
Santa Rosa City Council
City Hall
100 Santa Rosa Avenue
Santa Rosa, CA 95404
RE: City Council Goal Setting
Mayor Rogers and Members of the City Council,
As you discuss goals and priorities for Santa Rosa, we urge you to focus on supporting a vibrant community and stable economy, while taking a data driven and evidence-based approach. The following are the areas we believe are necessary to boost economic activity and vibrancy, and are key to healthy economy and thriving community for all:
Economic Development & Business Support – The City’s economic development efforts should include investments to promote business recruitment, retention, and entrepreneurism. Local policies, tools and services should be designed to help local companies become more competitive and grow and thrive where they are rather than relocate. We support investments in infrastructure, and the use of Enhanced Infrastructure Financing Districts, that will help attract desired businesses with good paying jobs and development that will generate the tax base to sustain and produce a return on those investments. To support our local economy, local business success must have sustained support including prioritization of local vendors for government contracts and refraining from imposing new or increased permitting, local development impact or other construction-related fees for a meaningful period of time.
Housing - Our housing crisis is the greatest threat to our long-term economic, business, and cultural success. We need incentives and opportunities that create more housing of diverse types at all market levels. Without significantly expanding the housing supply for our residents, housing costs will continue to be an overwhelming burden to many. This crisis level need warrants an emergency waiver of impact fees for affordable and workforce housing. We support housing policies to improve the time, certainty, and cost of housing development, including by right development, to meet our local and regional housing needs. It is critical that these streamlined polices are implemented with oversight for consistency at a department level to be sure they are being prioritized as intended and to maintain the trust and certainty they were meant to create.
Homelessness - We support policies, partnerships, and funding to increase our stock of housing for low- and extremely low-income individuals and families. We support safe and structured short and long-term interim solutions to the homelessness challenges that are having a negative impact on our entire community, and see models in other California cities for consolidated medical and housing services in partnership with local hospitals and nonprofits, as promising. We encourage incentives, protecting dedicated local housing funds, and securing partnerships and initiatives to build or repurpose shelter for the unhoused with wrap around services. This focus should not decouple housing from services to address the root causes of homelessness, and funding should be tied to data and to accountability, prioritizing programs that have demonstrated results. Addressing unlawful behavior is not the criminalization of homelessness itself. We support law enforcement efforts to stop and
prosecute property and violent crime, and to stop risky health and safety conditions throughout the community including our homeless population.
Minimizing Risk of Fires - The fires we have experienced in recent years highlight the need to use our natural resources in a manner that is sustainable in the long-term and to promote land use and management practices and building codes that minimize the impact of natural disasters. Wildfires have become a part of living in this region, underscoring the need for preparedness, response, and mitigation as an ongoing effort rather than one- off projects. We support an ongoing and comprehensive vegetation management program in Santa Rosa. To help mitigate the risk locally, we support the implementation of the Wildfire Action Plan provided by the Chamber’s Advocacy Council and support continued investment in local fire services capabilities.
Downtown - Investment in our downtown represents an opportunity to generate lasting benefits including thriving employers and access to good jobs, environmentally sustainable development, and increased tax revenue. The support of our small downtown businesses is key to accelerating our economic recovery and to support economic growth and vibrancy. We support the use of City resources and tools such as Enhanced Infrastructure Financing Districts to encourage critical housing and commercial developments downtown. To capture the return on investment to develop Courthouse Square funding and resources for events and cultural opportunities; beautification, lighting, and wayfinding; to address public safety issues; and support for the addition of missing components such as grocery options, convention, performing arts, and meeting and event space are critical.
Early Care & Education - There is a clear economic case for investing in access to early education and care.
Parents rely on child care to help them enter, re-enter, or remain in the workforce and employers depend on that access for recruitment and retention of their workforce. We support investments in quality early education and care, including streamlined permitting processes and incentives and funding for retention and expansion of existing child care facilities and development of new child care facilities.
We believe that successfully addressing these priorities is critical for the future of Santa Rosa. As always, we stand ready to participate and assist in these efforts.
Respectfully,
Peter Rumble
CEO, Santa Rosa Metro Chamber
From: Ananda Sweet
To: CityCouncilListPublic
Cc: City Council Public Comments; CMOffice
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Council Goal Setting
Date: Monday, February 5, 2024 11:58:22 AM
Attachments: image001.png
image002.png
image003.png
image004.png
Council Priorities 2024.pdf
Good morning Mayor Rogers and Council Members,
Please see the attached letter regarding City Council priorities for this week’s City Council Goal Setting session.
Thank you,
Ananda Sweet
ANANDA SWEET | VP of Public Policy & Workforce Development
SANTA ROSA METRO CHAMBER
50 Old Courthouse Square, Suite 110, Santa Rosa, CA 95404 DIRECT 707-636-3662
| P 707-545-1414 | F 707-545-6914
SANTAROSAMETROCHAMBER.COM
From: Margaret DeMatteo
To: City Council Public Comments
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Legal Aid comment regarding City Council Goal Setting Session on Tuesday, February 6, 2024 Date: Monday, February 5, 2024 11:59:49 AM
Attachments: Outlook-cid f27831.png
Model Senior Mobilehome Park Housing Overlay Ordinance.pdf
02.06.24 Public Comment Regarding Santa Rosa Goals and Priorities.pdf Hello,
Please see attached public comment on behalf of Legal Aid, along with a proposed model ordinance.
Margaret DeMatteo (she/her/hers)
Housing Policy Attorney
144 South E Street Suite 100
Santa Rosa, CA 95404
[email protected]
Cell: 415-952-6519
Fax: 707-542-0177
https://legalaidsc.org/
CONFIDENTIAL AND PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION
The information in this email message is for the confidential use of the intended recipients only.
The information is subject to the attorney-client privilege and may be attorney work product.
Recipients should not file copies of this email with publicly accessible records. If you are not an intended recipient or an authorized agent responsible for delivering this email to an intended recipient, you have received this email in error, and any further review, dissemination, distribution, copying or forwarding of the email is strictly prohibited. If you received this email in error, please notify us by return email and delete this message. Thank you.
1 of 4
144 South E Street, Suite 100 Santa Rosa CA 95404 Telephone (707) 542-1290 Fax (707) 542-0177 www.legalaidsc.com
Legal Aid's mission is to promote social justice and
advance basic human rights for vulnerable people in our community.
February 5, 2024
Mayor Natalie Rogers
Vice Mayor Mark Stapp
Council Member Eddie Alvarez
Council Member Dianna MacDonald
Council Member Victoria Fleming
Council Member Chris Rogers
Council Member Jeff Okrepkie
Sent electronically to: [email protected]
Re: Comment on City Council Goal Setting Session on February 6, 2024
To the Honorable Santa Rosa City Council and Staff,
Legal Aid of Sonoma County (LASC) thanks you for the opportunity to weigh in on the City of Santa Rosa’s goals and priorities for the upcoming year. With your help, LASC assists mobilehome owners and low-income tenants in Santa Rosa with a variety of issues including eviction defense, habitability issues, unlawful rent increases and obtaining access to housing/benefits. This year, we hope to see the City address some of the critical issues our clients face, by adopting protections that prevent displacement and increase housing quality and stability. The policies we recommend are outlined below.
These policies are consistent with the City’s goals and priorities adopted last year, specifically to 1) deliver housing for all; 2) reduce homelessness and its impacts; 3) ensure a healthy and safe community for all; and 4) promote economic and community vibrancy.
They are also consistent with and help the City meet the 6 th Cycle Housing Element
programs, specifically Program H-32: Tenant Protection/Eviction Prevention Measures and Program H-14: Mobile Home Park Rent Control, Program H-26: Housing for Senior Households and programs H-10 through H-12 regarding improving the conditions of the existing housing stock. Thank you in advance for your consideration.
1. Strengthen Protections for Mobilehome Park Residents LASC appreciates your commitment to safeguarding the well-being of seniors and mobilehome residents of Santa Rosa. LASC has been a long-time advocate for the rights and welfare of our senior population, and we encourage the City Council to consider setting priorities around strengthening protections for the mobilehome residents once more, by lowering the in-place transfer fee in the rent stabilization ordinance from 10% to 5%, mirroring the County Rent Stabilization Ordinance. Additionally, we urge the City to adopt a senior mobilehome park overlay zone (“overlay zone”), to
Board of Directors
President
Jennifer Douglas
Dickenson, Peatman &
Fogarty
Vice President
Jacquelynne Ocaña
Private Fiduciary
Secretary
Jack Sanford
Abbey Weitzenberg
Warren & Emery
Treasurer
Ann Hudson
Exchange Bank
Past President
Chris Grabill
SRJC Wildfire Resilience
Program
Directors
Thomas Del Monte
Spaulding McCullough &
Tansil
Henry Huang, J.D. CPA
Meridian Realty &
Mortgage Co.
Ken Molinaro
PDS Vacations LLC
Chris Smith
Retired Columnist
Kara Wilson
Cooley LLP
Executive Director
Ronit Rubinoff
2 of 4
144 South E Street, Suite 100 Santa Rosa CA 95404 Telephone (707) 542-1290 Fax (707) 542-0177 www.legalaidsc.com
ensure the long-term stability of housing for aging mobilehome park residents.
Within Santa Rosa city limits there are 17 rent-controlled mobilehome parks with a total of 2,155 spaces. Twelve of the seventeen parks are designated for residents that are fifty-five and older, making up a total of 1,754 spaces.
This means that 81% of the rent-controlled park spaces in Santa Rosa are currently designated for older tenants.
With close to a quarter (23.5 percent) of senior households falling into the extremely low-income group, senior housing is an identified need of the city. The city committed to support the needs of senior households in Program H-26 of the 6th Cycle Housing Element Plan.
However, there has been a trend of park owners converting parks from senior to all ages parks to increase profit.
Allowing mobilehome parks to convert to all-age parks would restrict the housing that is available for seniors who already have a narrow selection of affordable housing. Our continuously growing older adult population has played a pivotal role in shaping our community, and it is our duty to address the challenges faced by these residents. By protecting the rights and interests of our senior residents in mobilehome parks we are not only upholding community values but also setting an example for other cities in Sonoma County to emulate. Cotati and Petaluma have implemented similar ordinances for senior mobilehome park zoning overlays and we urge you to follow their lead, especially considering the impact that it would have in a City that has so many senior parks to begin with.
Senior restricted mobilehome parks preserve affordable housing options and communities for seniors that would not otherwise be available. We are concerned about the possibility of more park owners converting senior parks to all-age parks. Preserving the limited housing options that seniors have and ensuring they have access to communities exclusive to their needs is essential. As the City Council is considering the goals and objectives for the next year, we encourage the consideration of the proposed model ordinance included with this letter, to establish a senior mobilehome park overlay zone.
2. Adopt a Proactive Rental Inspection Program
Substandard conditions in the home are responsible for a wide array of significant health problems, such as lead poisoning or respiratory conditions that result from exposure to mold. Poorly maintained, substandard housing can also have a negative effect on neighboring property values and can contribute to blight. As rental housing is more likely to be substandard than owner-occupied housing, tenants are at higher-than-average risk.
Most municipalities maintain code enforcement programs to ensure the safety and welfare of their residents.
Traditionally, these programs have been complaint-based: in response to a resident’s complaint about a substandard housing condition that a landlord has not fixed upon request, a municipal code enforcement officer conducts a housing inspection. If the complaint is substantiated, the officer begins enforcement proceedings. This process is often lengthy and time-consuming and requires tenants to initiate the process via a complaint. Many tenants forego this process out of fear of retaliation or rent increases.
Proactive rental inspection (PRI) programs require covered units to be inspected on a regular basis to ensure that they are safe and habitable. Also known as systematic or periodic code enforcement programs, inspections take place at designated intervals and quickly identify and target exterior and interior code violations, though they may also be triggered by an event, such as a change in tenancy. Tenants may avoid filing complaints for a number of reasons, like fear of retaliation and eviction, or immigration status. PRI programs shift the burden from sole reliance on tenant complaints to more prevention-based practices. Additionally, PRI programs prevent housing stock from falling into irreparable disrepair and are a more economically sound alternative to demolition and replacement.
To ensure effective intervention, PRI programs rely on accurate rental data to operate. This usually takes the
3 of 4
144 South E Street, Suite 100 Santa Rosa CA 95404 Telephone (707) 542-1290 Fax (707) 542-0177 www.legalaidsc.com
form of a rental registry or licensing program in which landlords must register their units with the City. The registry can be budget neutral, by imposing a nominal fee on landlords ($40-70 per year per unit) that could be passed through to tenants, with exceptions made for low-income tenants. Rental registries ensure that adequate information is recorded regarding rental housing resources and allows officials to easily communicate with property owners. In Syracuse, New York, for instance, housing officials have access to demographic data relating to code violation types which allows them to tailor their code enforcement efforts with greater accuracy.
Legal Aid regularly assists tenants with severe habitability issues in Santa Rosa, ranging from toxic mold to rodent infestation. Low-income renters tend to experience the worst housing conditions. Enacting a proactive rental inspection program would meet the housing priorities previously identified by the City Council by ensuring a healthy and safe community for all. The City previously looked at a proactive, or mandatory rental inspection program, though it never got to City Council’s consideration. 1 Further, the City committed to
improving code enforcement and the quality of existing housing in their 6th Cycle Housing Element Plan (see Programs H-10-12). LASC urges consideration of a pilot program to improve housing quality for all tenants in Santa Rosa.
3. Consider Additional Tenant Protections to Increase Housing Stability and Decrease Displacement Santa Rosa is home to the largest number of renters in the County. We know that housing cost burden and the resulting imbalance of power between tenants and landlords, has increased exponentially. 2 The statewide
Tenant Protection Act (AB 1482 and SB567 taking effect 4/1/24), has many loopholes that tenants routinely fall through. Vulnerable Santa Rosa residents need protection from arbitrary evictions, predatory rent hikes, and landlord harassment. We recommend the City consider the following options to meet the requirements of 6 th Cycle Housing Element Program H-32 and to address the vulnerabilities and needs of all tenants, including low-income community members, people of color, and protected classes at risk.
a. Rental Registry
A Rental Registry can provide the City with data required to enact meaningful policies to prevent tenant displacement. It can collect data on evictions and identify systemic housing issues in unincorporated areas. It can be used to facilitate a proactive rental inspection program to address maintenance and preservation of rental housing. It can also be used to implement eviction protections that prevent displacement of tenants should the City choose. Without such a registry, the City will be unable to accurately assess the needs of renters.
b. Rent Stabilization and Just Cause Eviction Protections
Rent Stabilization and Just Cause protections preserve existing non-subsidized affordable housing stock and affirmatively further fair housing. Unaffordable rent hikes and no-cause evictions disproportionately impact our BIPOC community, as well as seniors, persons with disability, and low-income renters. Rent Stabilization policies limit how much a landlord can raise the rent on an existing tenant each year by tying the allowable increase to inflation thereby maintaining affordability. Just Cause for eviction policies protect tenants from being evicted without a specific justification and ensure that landlords follow the law regarding the eviction process. It is essential to pair Rent Stabilization with Just Cause to prevent landlords from evicting tenants to raise rents or from raising rents so much that tenants are forced to leave.
1 https://www.sonomanews.com/article/news/housing-disputes-fuel-debate-over-governments-response-in-sonoma-county/ 2 https://generationhousing.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/2023_0322-Making-the-Rent-The-Human-Price-of-Housing-Cost- Burden.pdf
4 of 4
144 South E Street, Suite 100 Santa Rosa CA 95404 Telephone (707) 542-1290 Fax (707) 542-0177 www.legalaidsc.com
The statewide Rent Cap and Just Cause protections of the Tenant Protection Act of 2019 (“TPA”) fall short of providing adequate tenant protections. The statewide Rent Cap limits massive annual rent increases, which can help prevent rent hikes that force renters out overnight, but it is not true rent stabilization, which ensures that rents do not rise faster than inflation and can provide long term stability. Statewide Just Cause protections fail to protect tenants from arbitrary evictions in the first year of their tenancy, and tenants who rent certain types of homes (like single family homes and subsidized housing) are not covered. Certain no-cause evictions are rampantly abused, especially those sought through the Ellis Act (where the landlord is allegedly withdrawing a unit from the rental market). The TPA’s “Substantial remodel” loophole allows landlords to evict a tenant, to remodel their unit, and the tenant is not allowed to return. Rent Stabilization and/or Just Cause protections exist in over thirty-five cities and counties across California and have a strong track record of success. We urge you to prioritize these stabilizing policies for this year and are available to assist as needed.
c. Anti-Harassment Ordinance
An anti-harassment ordinance mandates that a landlord cannot in bad faith engage in conduct intended to influence a tenant to vacate their rental unit. The purpose of the ordinance is to prevent landlords and their representatives from harassing their tenants, to encourage landlords to follow the law and uphold their responsibility to provide habitable rental properties, and to give tenants legal recourse through the adopted Ordinance when they are subjected to harassment by owners. LASC sees harassing conduct by landlords or property managers on a regular basis but lacks the tools to do anything about it without a local ordinance like the one recently adopted in Concord.
3 We urge you to consider adding this protection to further increase housing stability.
d. Community or Tenant Right to Purchase (“COPA/TOPA”)
COPA/ TOPA gives tenants and/or qualified organizations advance notice that the landlord intends to sell the building, along with specified timelines to exercise the “right of first offer” to buy the property before it goes on the market and the “right of first refusal.” A TOPA or COPA will prevent displacement, stabilize current residents TOPA/COPA expands stability and wealth-building opportunities for tenants by creating pathways to homeownership.
Conclusion
Thank you for your efforts to improve housing stability for individuals and families in Santa Rosa. LASC is available to assist with the recommendations submitted herein and looks forward to working together to keep people housed.
Sincerely,
Margaret DeMatteo, Housing Policy Attorney
E
ncl.
3 https://www.cityofconcord.org/903/Tenant-and-Landlord- Resources#:~:text=The%20purpose%20of%20the%20ordinance,when%20they%20are%20subjected%20to
MODEL SENIOR MOBILEHOME PARK OVERLAY ZONE ORDINANCE
PREPARED BY LEGAL AID OF SONOMA COUNTY
ORDINANCE ADOPTING ZONING CODE TEXT AMENDMENTS PERTAINING TO THE
ESTABLISHMENT OF A SENIOR MOBILEHOME PARK OVERLAY ZONE AND
RELATED REGULATIONS
WHEREAS, there are seventeen (17) rent-controlled mobilehome parks in the City of Santa Rosa, twelve (12) of which have long operated as senior mobilehome parks, providing an important source of affordable senior housing; and
WHEREAS, the twelve (12) senior mobilehome parks represent approximately 1754 spaces out of 2,155 total spaces, or 70.5% percent of all mobilehome spaces in the City of Santa Rosa; and
WHEREAS, older adults represent the fastest growing age group of the homeless population in California, the primary drivers of the this are unsustainable rent burdens and an inadequate supply of affordable, accessible, and stable housing; and
WHEREAS, nearly a quarter (23.5 percent) of senior households in Santa Rosa falling into the extremely low-income group, senior housing is an identified need of the City; and
WHEREAS, the conversion of existing senior mobilehome parks to all ages parks will result in the loss of existing affordable and naturally occurring senior housing within the City and present a threat to, and a specific adverse impact upon the public health, safety and welfare of low and/or fixed income seniors in the City and the City's ability to provide safe and decent housing opportunities; and
WHERAS, a senior mobilehome park overlay zone is a zoning district that requires at least 80% of the spaces in a mobilehome park to be occupied by a resident who is 55 years of age or older.
The goal of these districts is to preserve affordable housing options for seniors and prevent mobile home parks from being converted to other land uses; and
WHEREAS, in contrast to other senior housing in the City, mobilehome parks afford seniors the ability to live in their own homes rather than in apartments and provide a senior living community in a low-rise setting that typically provides a clubhouse for community events and socializing as well as recreational facilities inside the park so that the residents can easily walk to these facilities and events; and
WHEREAS, seniors in these parks have deliberately chosen to reside in senior-specific communities to enjoy a quieter and more age- appropriate living environment; and
WHEREAS, the decision to purchase mobilehomes in senior parks was often based on the understanding that these parks would only accept residents who meet the age requirement of being 55 years of age or older; and
WHEREAS, the prospect of converting senior parks to family parks may disrupt the peaceful and tranquil atmosphere that has been enjoyed by senior residents, including those who have grandchildren visiting; and
WHEREAS, the City recognizes the importance of respecting the preferences and expectations of its senior residents and preserving the unique character and ambiance of senior mobilehome parks that have been specifically designed to cater to the needs and desires of seniors seeking a quiet and supportive community; and
WHEREAS, Senior-only parks often develop a close-knit and supportive community of residents who share similar interests and lifestyles and introducing a more diverse age group could alter the social atmosphere and dynamics of the community, potentially affecting the sense of belonging and camaraderie among existing residents; and
WHEREAS, with the addition of families and children, there might be an increase in noise and activity levels within the park and this change could be disruptive for senior residents who value peace and quiet and may affect their overall well-being; and
WHEREAS, the existing amenities and services in the park may change or be reconfigured to cater to the needs of all-age residents and this could mean a reduction in amenities specifically tailored to seniors, affecting their quality of life; and
WHEREAS, some seniors may have chosen to live in a senior-only park because of health- related reasons and the stress or disruption caused by the conversion could potentially impact their health and wellbeing; and
WHEREAS, all-age parks generally attract more residents, leading to a higher number of vehicles entering and exiting the community and this can result in increased traffic and congestion on nearby roads, potentially affecting the safety of pedestrians and other motorists; and
WHEREAS, the potential conversion of senior mobilehome parks to family parks, contrary to previous representations and agreements on which residents of senior mobilehome parks have relied in entering their leases, poses a significant threat to the rights and expectations of senior residents who have invested in their homes and chosen these communities as their places of residence; and
WHEREAS, mobilehome park residents' reliance on the representations made by park management and owners in the leases, rental agreements, and park rules underscores the importance of maintaining the integrity of these agreements to ensure that senior residents are not unfairly forced to uproot their lives and homes; and
WHEREAS, by the use of Civil Code Section 798.25 to convert senior mobilehome parks without the consent and despite the objections of the senior residents undermines the protections afforded to seniors that have existing leases in the self-designated senior parks; and WHEREAS, it is essential to recognize the unique needs and vulnerabilities of senior citizens and to ensure that they are not subject to housing instability, unsustainable financial burdens, and emotional distress due to sudden changes in park regulations; and
WHEREAS, the lack of available affordable housing options for seniors in the City and surrounding areas may force them to relocate to other cities or states, separating them from their established communities, support networks, and medical care providers and facilities; and
WHEREAS, the displacement of senior residents from existing senior mobilehome parks could lead to increased homelessness and financial hardship for those unable to afford alternative housing options; and
WHEREAS, senior mobilehome parks have been established to cater to the unique needs and preferences of senior citizens, providing a safe, quiet, and supportive community environment; and
WHEREAS, the loss of senior mobilehome parks may also have negative effects on the mental and emotional well-being of senior residents, as the sense of community and companionship they have grown accustomed to may be lost in a family-oriented park setting; and
WHEREAS, preserving the limited supply of senior mobilehome parks in the City is essential to ensure that seniors can continue to age in place and maintain a sense of stability and belonging in their retirement years; and
WHEREAS, according to a 2021 American Association of Retired Persons survey, more than ninety-seven percent (97%) of persons age fifty (50) and older would prefer to stay in their current residence as long as possible; and
WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the City to protect the rights and quality of life of its senior residents, recognizing their contributions to the community and the importance of meeting their unique housing needs; and
WHEREAS, the California Mobilehome Park Residency Law, the California Fair Employment and Housing Act, and the Federal Fair Housing Act each recognize the need for and value of senior housing by expressly exempting facilities in which 80 percent ofthe units are occupied by at least one person who is 55 years of age or older from the requirement to rent to families with children; and
WHEREAS, the Housing for Older Persons Act amendments to the federal Fair Housing Act, 47 U.S.C. 3607( b), and the provisions of the implementing regulations set forth in the Code of Federal Regulations (24 CFR 100.304(b)( 4)) and the Appendix thereto (64 Fed.Reg. 16331) provide that a senior housing facility or community includes a municipally zoned area and that an area zoned by a unit of local government as " senior housing" satisfies the intent requirement of the senior housing exemption from the provisions of the Fair Housing Act prohibiting discrimination based on familial status; and
WHEREAS, the federal Fair Housing Act, California Fair Employment and Housing Act, and California Mobilehome Park Residency law permit local regulation of mobile home park housing to provide housing for older persons" to include housing that is restricted to occupancy of at least 80 percent ofunits by at least one person who is age 55 or older; and
WHEREAS, the California Unruh Civil Rights Act (California Civil Code Section 51 et seq.) allows establishment of mobile home housing that is age-restricted where such restrictions are consistent with the Federal Fair Housing Act and its subsequent amendments and existing implementing regulations; and
WHEREAS, the City intends that this Ordinance be consistent with, comply with and implement the federal Fair Housing Act as amended by the Housing for Older Persons Act and the California statues providing senior housing exemptions from statutes prohibiting restrictions in housing based on age and familial status; and
WHEREAS, this ordinance codifies the City' s intent to provide " housing for older persons," consistent with the Housing for Older Persons Act amendments to the federal Fair Housing Act 42 U. S. C. § 3607(b) and the provisions for implementation as set forth in the Code of Federal Regulations ( 24 CFR §100. 304(b)(4)) and the Appendix thereto (64 Fed. Reg. 16331), which provide that a permissible senior housing facility or community includes a municipally zoned area, and which zone, when established, satisfies the " intent" requirement of the " housing for older persons" exemption from the provisions of the Fair Housing Act prohibiting discrimination based on-familial status; and
WHEREAS, in 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022 and 2023 the Council adopted policy priorities, which include a housing for all strategy, reaffirming the Council’s housing goals.
THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF SANTA ROSA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The Council of the City of Santa Rosa finds based on evidence and records presented, that:
A. The proposed amendments are consistent with the goals and policies of the Santa Rosa General Plan, and all applicable Specific Plans in that the amendments further existing policies related to housing and do not allow density beyond what is currently allowed. The park spaces impacted by this Ordinance will continue to count toward the City’s overall housing stock, preserving a form of naturally occurring affordable senior housing, furthering the stated intention to support the needs of senior households in Program H-26 of the 6th cycle Housing Element Plan.
B. The proposed amendments would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City.
C. The proposed amendments are internally consistent with other applicable provisions of this Zoning Code.
Chapter __ of the Santa Rosa Zoning Ordinance, ____, is hereby amended to add a new Section _____as follows:
Senior Mobilehome Park Overlay District
Application of this chapter.
This chapter applies to all senior mobile or manufactured home parks that are regulated under the Rent Stabilization Ordinance.
Definitions.
The following words and phrases shall have the meanings set forth below when used in this chapter unless the context plainly requires otherwise:
Senior Mobilehome Park. A "senior mobilehome park" means a mobile or manufactured home park in whichat least eighty (80) percent of the spaces are occupied by, or intended for occupancy by, at least one person who is fifty-five (55) years of age or older.
Limitations on Rentals.
Spaces and mobilehomes in a senior mobilehome park overlay district shall be rented only to occupants who meet the senior occupancy requirements set forth in ___ of this section; provided, however, that the occupants of a space or mobilehome who do not meet the senior occupancy requirement in __of this section have rented a space and/or mobilehome in a senior mobilehome park before the effective date of this section and continue to occupy that space and/or mobilehome following the effective date of this section, they shall be allowed to remain in that senior mobilehome park, and provided further that when such occupant( s) cease to occupy that space and/ or mobilehome, the mobilehome and space shall be rented to occupants who meet the senior occupancy requirement in __ of this section.
Minimum Design and Performance Standards.
The signage, advertising, leases, rental agreements, and park rules and regulations for spaces in a mobilehome park in the senior mobilehome park overlay zone shall state that the park is a senior mobilehome park.
Annual Certification.
Each senior mobilehome park shall have procedures for verifying that it qualifies as a senior facility under applicable federal and/or state law and this section, including documentation establishing that at least 80 percent of the mobilehomes or spaces in the mobilehome park are occupied by at least one resident who is 55 years of age or older in accordance with __ of this section. These procedures shall provide for regular updates, through surveys, affidavits, or other means of updating the initial information supplied by the occupants of the mobile home park.
Such updates must take place at least once every two years. A summary of this occupancy verification documentation shall be available for inspection upon reasonable notice and request by city officials. The operator of each mobile home park in the senior mobilehome park overlay zone shall, on an annual basis, provide to the city' s housing director a certification that the subject mobile home park is in compliance with the senior occupancy requirement of this section, in substantially the following form:
I [name] hereby certify, under penalty of perjury in accordance with California law that there is at least one occupant 55 years of age or older in [number of units] units of the total [number of units in the park] units in the [name of the seniors mobile home park] senior mobilehome park. This certification is based on my personal knowledge of the residents, evidence provided to me in the form of official government documents containing specific information about the current age of the residents, resident affidavits, or age certifications made by residents in their current lease agreements."
The City shall establish the deadline for filing the annual certification, which, to the extent possible, shall be coordinated with the timing of filings as may be required pursuant to the City’s mobilehome rent stabilization program.
Designation.
The Senior Mobilehome Park Overlay District shall be designated by the symbol (MH-S) on the City of Santa Rosa Zoning Map. The (MH- S) designation applies to the twelve (12) senior mobilehome parks that exist in the City as of the effective date of this section, and to senior mobile home parks established in the City after the effective date of this section subject to the Overlay District. The twelve (12) senior mobilehome parks in the city as of the effective date of this section are:
Enforcement.
It shall be unlawful for any person to violate any provision of, or to fail to comply with any requirement of this chapter, or of any other applicable local, State, or Federal law.
Environmental Determination.
The proposed amendments have been reviewed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality ACT (CEQA) and the City Council has determined that adoption of this ordinance is exempt from CEQA under CEQA Guidelines Section 15060(c)(2) because the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment, and because it is not a project as defined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15378, as it has no potential for resulting in a physical change in the environment, directly or indirectly. Additionally, or alternatively, the Ordinance is exempt from CEQA under CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that this Ordinance or its implementation of the Amendments would have a significant effect on the environment, would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City. The Ordinance is also exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15301 in that no new development or construction is authorized by the Ordinance and nothing in the Ordinance permits any expansion of use beyond the level of land uses already existing in the City.
Severability
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or word of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid and/or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance.
Effective Date
This ordinance shall take effect on the 31st day following its adoption and, upon its effective date, adopted by the City Council on ________.