 It's two o'clock if councilmembers can turn on their cameras. Bonnie, welcome everyone. Happy New Year. Are we missing anybody? Everybody here. Donna will be up. Okay, so come to the 2 p.m. public portion of the closed session of the January 11th, 2022 meeting of the city council. Good to see everyone's faces again. Welcome back. If you would like to comment on a closed session item, now is the time to call in using the instructions on your screen. In this part of the meeting, the council will receive public testimony and therefore the public line will be closed and inaccessible. Please mute your television or streaming device once you call in and listen through the phone so there's no feedback. Please note there is a delay in streaming. So if you continue to listen on your television or streaming device, you may miss your opportunity to speak. I would like to ask the clerk to please call roll. Councilmember Coulentary-Johnson. That's it. Happy New Year. You will be absent. Vice Mayor Watson. Thank you. Time, are there any members of the public who would like to speak on any items in the closed session agenda? I will look for hands. Let's see, to raise your hand, press star nine. The attendees. I don't see any attendees on the list. I don't either. Okay. Hearing none, this meeting is adjourned and council will therefore then go into closed session. And we hope to return at three o'clock for our general session. Thank you. Mayor, this is Laura, the meeting's member. Mayor is absent. Vice Mayor Watson. Here. And Mayor Brunner. Present. I have a few announcements and then we'll move on to the regular meeting. Today's meeting is being broadcast live on Community Television Channel 25 and streaming on the city's website, cityofsanacruz.com. If anyone wishes to comment on an agenda item today, call in at the beginning of the item you are wanting to comment on using the instructions on your screen. We will provide instructions throughout the meeting whenever we move into an agenda item that will be opened up for public comment. Please mute your television or streaming device once you call in and listen through your phone. Please note there is a delay in streaming so if you continue to listen on your television or streaming device, you may miss your opportunity to speak. And when it's time for public comment, you'll be able to press star nine on your phone to raise your hand and when it is your time to speak, you will hear an announcement that you have been unmuted. The timer will then be set to two minutes. You may hang up once you have commented on your item of interest. Please also note public comment is heard only on items Council is taking action on and not regular updates and reports. The items that will be open for public comment during today's meeting are numbers five through 18 on our agenda. Council members, if there are any statements of disqualification today. Hearing none, speak clerk to announce any additions and or deletions. There are none. Oral communications is an opportunity for members of the community to speak to us on items that are not on the agenda. Oral communications will occur immediately after agenda item 18 today. If you may wish to make a comment during oral communications, please call in towards the end of item eight. So now I'd like to call on our city attorney, Tony Kandadi, to provide a report on our closed session. Yes, good afternoon, Mayor Brunner, members of the city council. Council met this afternoon at 2 p.m. in closed session via Zoom to consider the following matters. Item one was a conference labor negotiators concerning all bargaining units, fire IAFF local 1716, fire management, OE3 mid managers and supervisors, SCIU local 521 and unrepresented employees. Item two was a conference with legal council concerning liability claims. Claimants are Destiny, Makayla, Rogers and Susan O'Hara. Those items are also listed on your afternoon agenda as item 10. There was no reportable act. Thank you. Next, I'd like to and call on our city manager, Matt Huffaker to see if there are a couple of things that we need to talk about. Thank you, Mayor Brunner and council. I just want to start off by saying how honored I am to officially be on board and joining you for today's meeting is about 2022. Before I jump into my presentation, I just wanted to say the opportunity to also and for the president are filling in in the interim role over the last several weeks and courage for doing so. And I'm excited to be on board today and ready to roll at my seat. In one moment, I'm going to pull up patients. Everyone see my screen? So for starters today, I wanted to talk a little bit about friends that are occurring on the COVID front. I know it's top of mind for all of us to see the major uptick both here locally but across the nation, largely attributed to the Omicron variant. But I'm going to hand it over to Larry M. Wall, our homeless services response manager to provide an update on the many efforts underway in response to our homeless responses. But as we've all been following our region and a country we're experiencing a major uptick back as we enter the third year of operating under this pandemic, Santa Cruz County's COVID numbers have now reached their highest point that we've seen over the span of this pandemic. However, one encouraging data point is that we have not experienced a corresponding increase in COVID related deaths and our local health experts are really attributing that to the efficacy and effectiveness of the vaccines and really protecting our community members against the very illness related to the virus. But that said, the trends are certainly concerning. The chart shows the average number of daily cases in the county over the last 14 days. And as you can see, we've experienced a 321% over the last 14 days period. Magnificent increase based on the activity that we've seen over the last couple of months. As a result, hospitalizations, as well as ICU, visits are all projected to move in February. Area being closely monitored by all of our local health care providers as well as County Public Health. And projecting a peak as we move into the second week of February. And many of our health care providers are ramping up preparation for what the anticipated will be a major spike. Again, vaccine effectiveness continues to be the strongest, most effective way to protect ourselves, our loved ones, and community members. What is it, just share a few stats related to that to really underscore and emphasize why it's so important to ensure that we're vaccinated while there's boosters of opportunity. Those that are unvaccinated at 3.9, almost four times more likely to get COVID-19 than those fully vaccinated. We're also 10 times more likely to be hospitalized with COVID-19 than those that are fully vaccinated and almost 17 times more likely to not survive the virus than those that are fully vaccinated. So data really speaks for itself, right at home one more time. How important self, loved ones, vaccinated. So current trends in terms of what those vaccination numbers look like across the county, 71, almost 72% total county population are now fully vaccinated. That's good news and great progress that we made over the last year. We would still love to see that almost 30% unvaccinated, rich, so there's still major push on the vaccination front to try to get as many members as possible. There has been a recent change on the boosters in terms of the intervals of when one may want to go in and get your boosters shot as decreased from six months to five months. One other that was both protected. A few stats I wanted to run through real quick just to dive in a bit more in regards to boosters and vaccinations. We're at 69% fully vaccinated, 65 and older, 58% fully vaccinated, 50 to 64 years old population, 37% fully vaccinated, 8 to 49. Here are those percentages starting to fall. Only 21% fully vaccinated, 17 to 17 population and 3.4% fully vaccinated from 12 to 12 population. Definitely still some exposure there is we need to keep working on. I thought you would find those stats. The California Department of Public Health, H has provided new guidelines around isolation depending on whether you see the booster. You have an exposure and received or boost through the guidance now says masking is sufficient unless you receive a positive COVID test. So I know this has been a lot to come up with but it would be guidance constantly changing. That would be important. I just find that out for the benefit. And again, just a reminder indoor mask that orders remain in effect. Orders were more recently put in effects to keep quiet and County was ahead of the game with putting the restrictions in place late 2021 and will continue to be in place for, it continues to be another number of testing opportunities across the County probably the closest option for residents. People free building a part of that location is open 7 a.m. on Monday, Friday. By the way, go to the Santa Cruz County COVID-19 testing site and sign up for a test there. Almost a dozen other locations scattered across the County. I will just note that because of the uptake and I know many of us are this signing up for a test is proving to be more and more difficult. A lot of the walk-in locations have had wait time. So something to be prepared for that'll likely be the case for the upcoming few weeks, the peak of the Oba crime. I wanted to share these resources with everyone. In light of the uptake that we're experiencing both community, we're also seeing an uptake amongst our own employees and out of the abundance of caution, wanting to protect the safety of our employees while it's the public that we serve and the decision this week will allow. Any employees that can work remotely are able to do so or encouraging that that occurs. That's going to require that we make some adjustments for front counter hours. So if any members are interested in the latest find that information at www.cantipruce.com. I'll also just note I've been in conversations with Mayor around the format of our council meetings. Obviously under the circumstances, the decision was made to continue conducting these virtually for now. However, I know we all like to return to the chambers when we do so. I will continue to do that, review that on a case-by-case basis, determine at what point in the future where we can start offering opportunity for community members or to come on that. Okay, so that concludes my presentation. I'll go ahead and hand it over to Larry who provided an update on our homeless response. Good afternoon, Mayor and council members. Holly, Homeless Response Manager. Yeah, as Matt mentioned, I have some updates on recent activity related to homelessness response. First item I want to share with you all is progress at River Street transitional community camp. I want to let you know that we opened this camp last week. Thursday and Friday, when we moved the first campers into this site, we continue those efforts over the weekend and continue this week. My update earlier today is that we have 18 people in the camp presently. There's another five or six enrollment process. We expect that camp to be able to capacity, which is about 30 people by the next week. Recall that this is a different kind of camp model than we have done in the past. We're really focused on creating community, there are requirements around campus management, developing individualized service plans, and making progress towards goals to get connected to more permanent state housing. The next item I wanted to update you all on is the Salvation Army's program for a 24-7, 75 bed shelter up at the Armory. The council authorized the contract at the December 14th council meeting. This contract is currently in legal review by the Salvation Army's regional administration, and staff is working with them to start this program as soon as possible. I'll note this is one of the pieces of our efforts to expand shelter capacity in the city. Also related to that action at the December 14th meeting, there was a question about Salvation Army's participation in the state unemployment insurance program. We work with the city attorney's office on a legal analysis and they are under that under state law exempt due to their nature as a religious organization. Our hope is to get that program up running by relief, so that's how we're, that's our effort with Salvation Army to start that as soon as possible. The next update is related to the encampment at lot 27, Soquel Creek Water Districts, their pure watershed construction project that is making its way is now necessitating the closure and securing about lot of construction work to begin. The timeline provided the city was to be able to have that lot to your truck and contractor by January 14th this Friday. Based off of that timeline on Friday last week, the city provided notice to everyone camped in and around a lot, area by two day. People that were camping at the site were provided contact information to see outreach staff. And they were interested in a spot that's available at Benchlands, which is the space we let people know is available. So we've had the city outreach staff there letting them know that they're on site at Benchlands, both yesterday and today 10 to 1 p.m. for anybody that's interested. Contact information for our staff is provided on the notice provided to folks at lot 27. In addition, we've been able to assist two people from lot 27 have moved into the transitional community camp at 1220 River. And then today, outreach staff able to arrange for two more people to obtain spots at the county shelter of the neighborhood. We also simultaneously provided notice to Food Not Bombs, which operates on that nation and is placed to storage containers on that site. So they were noticed and given the same timeline of the need to move their property from that location by two days as well. The city staff is working with PD on enforcement that might be needed respect to those vacation places. The next plan closure of an encampment is the Deepa Park evacuation encampment that was established after the flooding of the low-lying areas around the San Lorenzo River back in December. As we noted at that time that this was intended to be a temporary encampment that we plan to close by the middle of January. So the plan is to close that encampment next week. We'll be noticing the campers at the end of this week. And with this camp, we'll be supporting relocation of those who are interested in moving back to the bench lands, which is for most people who are residing out right now, were before the flood. I think with both of these closures at lot 27 and with Deepa Park, the bench lands is an interim location. It's the available space that we have presently until additional shelter capacity line. The program of the primary will be a significant addition to our capacity. Again, it's directed by council. We were also working on a timeline over the longer period for closure. The next update is with respect to, say, working program development. And this is an association with the oversized vehicle ordinance. That is in the application process. We have a three-tier program in the works, tier one being emergency. Presently, the PD lot is available for emergency use. There are three spots there. One for use by associate faith community. Lot four is also being considered as a location for a tier one emergency spot is located outside of the coastal zone. Tier two, the overnight program. There's an update. The zoning administrator, we had a hearing with the zoning administrator with respect to a coastal development permit and design permit. That hearing took place on January 5th and it was carried over and continued on the 12th. That process is moving forward. Staff is also meeting weekly to move forward the other implementation steps related to tier two. That includes development of permitting process, application, signs and posting the signs that are required. And finally, tier three with 24-7 contracted service provider, part of a safe parking program. All the city issued an RFP for homelessness related services back in July, 2021 on a rolling deadline, next rolling deadline or responses this February 2nd, 2022. So we're re-posting that RFP on the city's webpage and trying to get the word out that we are interested in receiving official proposals. So that's in process. So after that deadline, staff are doing any responses for operating a safe parking program to be able to establish a tier three program. And then my last update, heard from council, there's a lot of work going on with respect to homelessness related issues, most of it's going on behind the scenes and you're interested in receiving more regular applications. So we're doing some internal communications planning to provide some more regular assistance updates. In the meantime, we'll continue to provide updates with the city managers weekly. It's my updates and I'm happy to answer any questions you all might have. Council member Cummings, I see you have your hand up. Thank you, Larry and Wally. Thank you, Larry and thank you, Matt, for those presentations. I did have two quick questions related to homelessness. I was under the impression with regards to the Bench Lens, I thought that many council members expressed some concern around when the floods happen and the impacts that happen after that and not wanting to see a homeless encampment at the Bench Lens and it is a flood zone. We're not currently out of rainy season yet. And so I'm just curious to speak to why we're still, we're moving people back into the area that where we saw so many issues and we're not out of the rainy season. Yeah, so the areas that are most at risk of flooding have been closed off. We've moved people out of the area and we'll continue to keep them out of that area. The main part what we call Bench Lens North is it's not at the same level of risk for flooding. It does get muddy, but this is the spot that we have available at this time to be able to offer people to go, this is where most folks in Depot Park were before flood. But we've moved people out of the areas that are at most risk. And again, the real goal is to be able to develop additional shelter capacity. Again, the Armory Program opened up 75 slots. And so our goal is really towards reducing and ultimately closing the Bench Lens area. And then my second question, the Armory has been up and running for a number of years now and the county's been running that program on understanding the city helped clear that site. What's happening with all those people who are currently there because it sounds like, you know, if the city's taking over, there's already people who were served, you know, the county's helping to serve up there. And we're saying we're gonna put in 75 beds. I think there's probably over 100 up there right now. And so I'm just curious, you know, sounds like we're losing capacity at the Armory and there's already people there. So how are we gonna like, you know, manage with people who are already up there and trying to serve their needs? And also the additional people that we have at the moment. Yeah, I mean, that's a good question over the long term. So near term, if there are still the county programs both in the Armory building and the pavilion that are continuing for a period of time, at the same time, we are adding our 75 bed program. But you're right, there's a timetable by June 30th, the county programs are gonna change or are gonna close, the pavilion may close sooner. I don't have an update on what the county's timeline or thinking is for that particular program up there. You know, that the main building, the plan was June 30th. So that is certainly a question in terms of how many people are going to be in those programs at the time that they close down, that they're continuing to work on the rehousing efforts and move people through that pipeline. But come July 1, there will be a loss capacity up at that location. We'll have our 75 person program. And I think the question is, what are the additional shelter opportunities that county would be looking at? And then I think, particularly in what, if any additional city role there might be. And we're also working on other transitional community camps. So the city has a plan for 150 additional shelter beds, but the status of the county programs does raise that bigger issue or more long-term issue of what the overall shelter capacity is within the city. I think it'd be good at some point if we could just get some numbers on the amount of beds that we've been able to offer over the past like two years at minimum and how that's changed over time between the city and the county. Because, you know, we went from 1220 river, getting the armory opened up, then having all the capacity with COVID. Now we're seeing, you know, a lot of the county programs coming off line, the city's stepping some up. And I think for the community, it'd just be good to have a sense of, you know, how many beds we've gained and lost over time and kind of what, how the city's performing now versus how it's performing in the past. Because we did also lose the, it was the River Street shelter that was one of the buildings on the Housing Matters campus where we lost a bunch of beds there. And I know that the capacity has changed over 1220 river and armory over time. So I think it would just be good to get a sense of, you know, what are some of the trade-offs between having other smaller programs and larger programs, and just how number of beds changed over time, helpful for having those discussions with. Thank you very much. And I appreciate all the work. Thank you. Yeah, well, we can work on that information. Thank you, Council Member Cummings. And I have Council Member Brown and then Council Member Golder. Thank you, Mayor Brunner. And thank you, Mr. Mollie, for providing that update. I just really want to appreciate all of the work that you're doing to try to navigate this really, really challenging situation. And with the direction that you've received from Council to really be responsive, I know it's not easy. So I just want to say thank you for that. And I guess Council Member Cummings asked most of my questions, but I did want to just ask a follow-up what's happening with Lot 27. I understand the need to have that space available for the Pure Water Soquel work. And I also understand that moving large shipping containers without a lot of notice and a lot of uncertainty about where they're gonna go, where food and not bombs is gonna go is another challenge. So, and I don't think they intend to cut down operations. So, and I think you all have, I'm not sure if everybody's had a chance to read a message from McKenry about the intention to leave on their terms when they are able to figure out that. And so I guess I'm just wondering, it's past two o'clock, we're here in the meeting. I'm not sure what's going on over there, but it seems to me that given the history of the city's effort to enforce evictions in various points in time, various locations under a variety of circumstances, they have been contentious and kind of on the ground in the moment and then the broader conversation. So I'm just wondering if there is any intention to try to work with Mr. McDonough bombs to maybe have a smoother transition in that space. I was curious about kind of, there's the order and there's need and then there's the kind of the reality that can be a little messier. So any thoughts on that? Yes, we have a plan place in the event that bombs does not remove its property. I have not received any participation from good not bombs representatives or your otherwise asking the city to for an additional time or additional plan. So at this point, there's been no communication. So we're prepared to move forward to be able to meet a timeline that's required of us for that. Council Member Brown, if I could step down Larry's comment, the demobilization of lot 27 has been a fairly significant lift for staff of multiple departments as you probably know and also being driven by some tight construction timelines as well as acknowledging that's working on the lot 27 transition is the same team that has made commitments demobilizing with the park, temporary evacuation encampment. So we understand that good not bombs relocation is a challenging one for the group and finding alternative locations I can't assure you and the council however that support offered transition to happen as quickly as possible in the hopes that we can keep on track timeline closure as well as the other efforts that I'm sure. Council Member Golder and then Council Member Calentari-Johnson. Thank you for all the updates. My question is someone is. Yes. Okay. Yes. It's perfect. Okay. I appreciate a nod is not sufficient. No, no, that's good. That's not sufficient. Good. So yeah, so those all those expenses are tracked. So we can be able to integrate that information in budget. Awesome. Thank you. That's all I just added that Council Member Golder really quickly that you're going to be building out a detailed comprehensive budget for all the work we're doing around homelessness. I know that that's specific councils as Larry has shared, there's a lot of moving parts through it, obviously keeping close track of it. We also want to make sure we can share that in a transparent way with the council, okay? So we will be working towards that comes at a good time as we move into the budget process and make sure more and more of that. Thank you. Thank you. Council Member Calantari-Johnson and then Council Member Cummings. Thank you, Mayor. And thank you so much, Mr. Muali, for the update. And I know a tremendous amount of work that you and Lee Butler and the whole team put into it. So thanks for all the work that you're doing as a state. I have two questions. Can you share if and how hotel vouchers are being as interim temporary alternative spaces for shelter as we move from these temporary spaces into our more transitional 1220 Army Salvation Army? And then I'll just ask both my questions if that's okay. My second question, comment and question is I've met with the county behavioral health and I know that we have been awarded a number of grants and there's a number of programs that are starting up to address some of the overlapping needs of those who are on house. Healing the Street is a program that's gonna come to our community really soon. I know that next week there's a kickoff event a virtual kickoff event. Can you share? I know we have our two by two meetings but can you share maybe specifically how we're coordinating with the Healing the Street program that is integrate behavioral health services for those who are on house? Yeah, so I can speak to the second part first of the second question and yeah, so there's this grant, the Healing the Streets and then also as we talked about, we're shared at December meeting too that the county's applied for cabinet resolution grant. But both those efforts fundamentally are really about trying to provide outreach services to connect, do outreach to connect and house to those kinds of supports with behavioral health, substance abuse, really providing additional capacity and staff to be able to engage the unhoused, work on case plans and get them protected to the service that they need to help be successful on that path to housing. So yeah, that grant is coming online. I believe they were hiring staff in January, I don't have an update on what that practice is, you're absolutely right. There's a kickoff event that is happening this week. So that is moving forward and that is another one of the efforts that are really particularly focused on the encampments around along the San Lorenzo River. They'll be focused on the bench lands with that particular project outreach. Now we also have a day challenge where the city staff is working with the county and that's an alignment with that program. So there's some new resources, new programs that are focused on that kind of work and outreach. And I apologize, I've got the first question. That's okay, just how we may be using hotel vouchers as transitioning folks from different spaces. Right, so we haven't been doing hotel motel vouchers recently last year and I forget the details, I apologize since it wasn't here but I know we've worked with local hotel situationally to be able to provide short-term hotel vouchers as a bridge to keep people some housing near term. So that is certainly a tool that we look at and utilize. We can reach back out to that provider. Maybe there's others and then I know the county's using that as a strategy as well to people in housing and outreach being able to make progress to other housing options. But that hasn't been intentionally part of our planning in this. Thank you and I know the city has as well but the county's made some strong relationships so more partnership there might be a good direction. So thank you for all the work and again appreciate how much work has been done to support them on the time. Thank you. Council member Cummings. Thank you, I just had one question because we received, and sorry if this was already mentioned but we received emails about people part. So I'm just curious about how long that can be in existence or how long we're anticipating it's gonna be there just so that we can get back to some of these folks since that was kind of an emergency. Yes and yeah the plan is that that is next week will be demobilizing that encampment and noticing we'll be going out later this folks there and again in that move we will be providing a real support to folks since we provided a location to that site. And then I guess one other follow up is that one of the things that was challenging with the bench links is there's been a number of attempts to have managed encampments there is that people then go up outside of the boundaries of the camp and then just set up. And so I guess if the goal is to try to not have people camping in the areas where there are potentially areas that are prone to flooding for example that's what approach is gonna be taken to make sure that we don't have people in those areas. Good question. And so those efforts are already ongoing since we moved people out of the area at blood risk and so it's been consistent. We've moved in, we've placed area close signs in those low-lying locations. We have our city outreach staff, Chris and Jeremy that are regularly engaging folks and providing spots in appropriate spots higher up in the bench lands. So it's that kind of, just that communication of facilitation with folks to get them to understand what the risk is and where an appropriate place is and so that's been continuing for the last four weeks and we'll continue to do that as long as we have an area to make sure that people are adhering to the need to stay out of those high-risk areas. That's where we're coming in as well as I think it goes without saying that the bench lands encampment, on the other end of the blood zone, nobody has the choice for a wall to encamp it. Here we're on temporary housing. So our goal and ongoing mission, Larry, and we've worked on a lot of time on the building shelf for that. So we need to get to a point where we have the whole alternative locations and the schools to really demobilize that encampment. This moves temporary and the long-term goal, make sure that we don't find ourselves. Thank you, Matt. And I just, I think I'll just comment briefly and reiterate that we've been updating the City of Santa Cruz website for the page on the City of Santa Cruz website where updates are being posted on a lot of these topics. CityofSantaCruise.com slash homelessness and there's information on the Depot Park parking lot encampment and some of the long-term plans as well as what the city has been investing in and doing. So it's a good spot to keep updated until our next Council update is the website. So thank you so much. Is there anything else in terms of for the community to stay updated? Like that website? Is the email homelessness.com still active? I believe it is. The email, we can always forward as well. Thank you so much. Does that conclude the City Manager's Report? Does Mayor, thank you for your time. Thank you so much for that update. Okay. We will now move on to the Council meeting calendar. The City Council will move on to 20 Bush. You follow me. Go ahead. Just gonna say there are no changes to calendar but just a reminder that we have our special meeting or a study session and our special meeting on the 8th starting at 4 p.m. Study session first and then the advisory body interviews following. Great, thank you. Moving on to the consent agenda. The consent agenda consists of items five through 17. For members of the public who are streaming this meeting, this would be the time for you to call in if you want to comment on items five through 17. They are on the agenda. There's instructions on the screen. Remember to mute your streaming device and press star nine to raise your hand and listen for the cue saying you've been unmuted. All items will be acted upon in one motion unless an item is pulled by a Council member for further discussion. Are there any Council members who wish to comment on or pull any items? Council member Cummings. I just have questions for item number 13. So I'm not gonna pull it, but I do have some questions. Okay, question on item 13 and that is the purchase of scaling food scraps containers. Okay, let's see Council member Callentari Johnson. Probably got the same email so they're probably the same questions and if they're not, then I have questions. On 13 as well. And Council member Brown. Yeah, I just have a quick question on item 12, the library naming rights. Well, library naming rights, great. Okay, so let's start with item number 12, the library naming rights. Yeah, thank you. So this is a recommendation to accept naming rights gift agreements for the Brantza-40 and Garfield Park branch libraries and we received a list at a gender report of what those are. I am aware of other similar efforts in particular. I just wanna call out the campaign to raise funds for the children's room at the Brantza-40 library or of Allison Endert. And so I'm just wondering if it's not on there and I'm just wondering if this is something that is gonna be ongoing and that hasn't come to us yet or like, you know, I wanna support these and I also wanna make sure that we leave space for others that may come our way. And I'm assuming that one would. So I'm not sure if anybody from the library is here. The lawn will burn library director and the manager, Matt Huffacher and Bonnie Bush, you have your hand up. I do. I was just gonna say that Yolande let me know that she is gonna be available after, unavailable after 4 p.m. And because the meeting started late. I see, thank you for that. So if it's not something that can be answered today, that's okay. I just wanted to point it out that there are gaps. I don't wanna close your opportunity. Is that something that you can follow up with? Yeah, I definitely noted comes from a brown and we certainly a circle back with the president and it would be an opportunity to have a conversation with Yolande about it. Great, thank you. Thank you. Okay, we had two questions on item 13 from Calentari Johnson and council member Cummings. It was a motion to award a contract for the purchase of six gallon food scrap containers from EcoVision Environmental in the amount of 225,000 from the Refuse Fund. Council member Cummings. Mayor, so we had a member of the public who reached out to us with a few questions and I was just gonna see if maybe someone from Public Works could just give a summary of the answers that came up with those questions, address them at the time. Sure, Mark. Yeah, go ahead, Mark Dettel. Mark Dettel, director of Public Works. I'd like to ask Christine Perez. She's actually the project manager and I'd like to have her provide that input. So, Christine, go ahead and turn on your microphone and your camera. You're gonna have to speak up a little bit. Very quiet. I can hear you but very faintly. I can turn my volume up. Maybe we can proceed on Mark Dettel with- Yeah, I'm happy to give the answer to the questions that Christine provided. So, there was a question about the purchase of the equipment, the six gallon food supply containers. There was a question if we could merge our purchase order with other statewide collective services for a better price. We've researched these containers. It sounds good in theory, but the county's going a different approach. They're actually using their green waste container. We have, the reason they're doing that is they have to, they're going to a compost option where they would take all their food scraps from Marina. The city, our green waste actually processed the, we use it at the farm right across from Dimeo Lane right across the highway. It's a soil amendment. And if we add food scraps to that, then we can't continue that operation and we have to haul our material to a compost facility, which would significantly add to our carbon footprint. We've invested in equipment that'll actually process cereal and then we will take it to our wastewater treatment plant to fully digest it. We'll generate electricity out of the food waste. So it's kind of a complete process. There was a question about the type of plastic in the six gallon containers. And you wanted to make sure they're virgin plastic or it's not virgin plastic, it's part of it's recycle and it is. We did research that and it is a recyclable product. It's a portion of recycled content. Let's see. It's a six gallon container that I put it under your sink and then it could be taken outside placed next to your recycle or your waste bin and it'll be picked up separately on a separate type of rock that will fit up. He was asking if we could use some sort of compostable bag that we could use and that would eliminate the cleaning of the spin. Currently, there really isn't a compost. There isn't a bag that would the volume that we would need and have to operate that way. So we're working with the bin. And let's see. I would say that he also asked under the Transportation and Public Works Commission they've reviewed the item that's for your approval. When we've been in communication with Public Works Transportation Commission made several presentations keeping the commission appraised the various food scraps collection pilot program currently ongoing, as well as the implementation of SB 1383. And the Public Works Transportation Commission has provided positive feedback. He's in show enthusiastic support. So I think we're consistent with his comment on that regards. Happy to answer any other questions that you may have on this project. That ends my question. Thank you. Yes. Council Member Calantari-Johnson, did that answer your questions as well? Great. Thank you, Mark Dettl. You're very welcome. Sorry about the microphone for Kristen. We'll get that thing done. Sorry, Kristen. I did receive her responses that email. So appreciate that information. Okay, at this time, let's see where are we? If there are any members of the public that would like to any item on our consent agenda. Now is time, please press star nine on your phone to raise your hand. And when it is your time to speak, you will hear an announcement that you have been unmuted. The timer will then be set to a minute. Any attendees? Hello, attendees. Thank you for attending this meeting with us. We're brown, but not any attendees. With their hands up at this time. Okay, Janine are these press stars, can you unmute yourself? Hi, everyone. My name is Janine Roth and I am in the Seabright area and just wanted to say I was part of the pilot project for the composting. And it is a game changer. It is fantastic. So I just wanted to put in a positive word for that excellent pilot program and really excited to see it go everywhere. Thank you. Thank you, Janine. Are there any other attendees that would like to speak to consent agenda items? Seeing none other, I will move it back. I'm looking for a motion on the item, our consent agenda and I see council member Brown. I'll move the consent agenda. And council member Cummings. Second. We have a motion by Brown and a second by Cummings. I'd like to ask the clerk to take a roll call vote please. Council member Calentary-Johnson. Okay. Boulder. However, I would like to register a no vote on item 10. Council member Meyers is absent by Mayor Watkins. Aye. And Mayor Brunner. Aye. The consent agenda. Thank you. Go into, here we go, our general business. Next step on our agenda is item number 18, State of California 2021 land use and housing legislation update. For members of the public who are streaming this meeting, if this is an item you wanna comment on, now is the time to call in using the instruction on your screen. If you are interested in commenting on State of California 2021 land use and housing legislation update, you will be asked to press star nine on your phone. Raise your hand. Are there any council members that have questions on item 18? And we have Matt and Hua, the planner and Lee Butler here presentation. Thanks Mayor Brunner. We saw a flurry of additional housing bills this year as has been the case in the last four or five years where there have been some very significant changes, whether that's updates to the Housing Accountability Act or changes to SB 35 and a three-lining efforts similar to that and AB 2162 which facilitates development of 100% affordable housing projects through a ministerial process. And there are some fairly significant bills that came through again this year. What we tried to do last year was provide you with an overview of some of those so that you would have a good understanding of what changes were coming down from the state. And we are here again today and Matt and Hua will give you an overview of some of those bills and dive a little bit deeper into some of them that have the biggest implications here for the city like SB 9. So with that, I'll hand it over to Matt. Thanks, Lee. And hello, Mayor, Vice Mayor and Council, our point up. And everyone see that okay? As Lee mentioned, there is a number of legislation related to land use and housing this past year but a large focus has been on SB 9. I'll save that for the end of the presentation. Deeper dive into that. So first we'll start off with other key pieces that relate to land use and housing. The first is regarding housing project approvals and there was SBA, which is an extension of the Housing Crisis Act of 2019, which we spoke about at the previous legislative update. That's been extended another five years from 2025 to 2030. And really what that does is continues the no net loss and replacement requirements in housing development project. And one other key piece of this legislation is that it actually, it makes the housing development project now one unit or greater rather than two units or greater under the previous legislation in SB 330. There are some exemptions for single family houses when it comes to this one unit, this one unit or greater, but otherwise it applies to all units. And then, so too. Matt, let me just add one point on that. The replacement requirements that Matt mentioned here, you'll recall the state actually put in affordable housing replacement requirements that are stronger than what we have in our ordinance. And so we were anticipating that the state might extend that and they've done so here. So those requirements, those replacement requirements apply and I counsel will recall in some of the projects if they're low income residents in the development, those have to be replaced affordable levels, not just the de-distriction. So that's an important component of extension is those affordability restrictions that have to be maintained. And like I'd mentioned that affordability replacement requirement, that's the specific exemption for a single family house. So for instance, if someone was renting a single family house and they were a lower income in that house was purchased and let's say it was redeveloped into another single family house, that affordability wouldn't have to be carried over the single family house that was just built, obviously. But any other unit that was either rent restricted in some way would have to be replaced to that, that same level of affordability and approximate size. And so for 8602, development impact fee termination by area, the city has several development impact fees and cities across California do. Many of them are determined by bedrooms or units, things of that nature. And what this bill is really saying is that if we are to study the fee and change the fee through a nexus process, like we do with all impact fee changes, that that next time we update an impact fee, it has to be determined by area rather than unit or bedroom. Then AB 1174 is a clarification and timelines regarding SB 35 and that's just clarifying that standards at the first SB 35 submittal apply to the project that at any time, despite modifications to that project during the application process. And it also adds additional timeline information where an application, an SB 35 application approved is valid indefinitely. But if it receives litigation file that's challenging the project, that approval is only valid for three years. So the key change there. And so now with housing production, you may have heard a bit about SB 10 and that's an option to permit a 10 units without CEQA. And the key word there is option. It is optional for cities to do this. There's no mandate with SB 10. And this would apply to urban infill sites near transit. And of course, there's definitions of that. And urban infill sites is much of Santa Cruz and transit site quality transit corridors and stuff, things of that nature. So it applies to those areas and it's for up zoning property only. So this could apply to properties in these sites that currently can only have five units on them, let's say. And the city now has the ability if they so choose to up zone that to up to 10 units without any CEQA requirements. Just so we're clear on that, that also allows us to change the general plan. So both the zoning and general plan can be modified it without under SB 10. The subsequent development projects would be subject. But the change in the general plan on a capacity allowed. And a B345 dealing with the sale of ADUs built by non-profit. So for instance, Habitat for Humanity can now build an ADU, someone's backyard. And that can then be available through that qualified non-profit construction. And SB 478 relates to a minimum floor area ratios for up to 10 units. So this prohibits local agencies from imposing an FAR of less than one. Housing projects of three to seven units in size and an FAR of less than 1.25 on projects eight to 10 units. And this also applies to minimum lot sizes and minimum lot coverage standard that might preclude these FARs. Those would not be permitted for this new legislation. Matt, can you just put in for those that are listening in and may not know about? More area ratios and things. Yeah, thank you. Sorry, so ADUs, accessory dwelling unit. CEQA is the California Environmental Quality Act. And then FAR relates to floor area ratio, which is really the, it's the ratio of the amount of square footage on a property being that's developed against the amount of land area of that property. So if a 10,000 square foot building was on a 10,000 square foot lot area, that FAR would be one, for instance. Thank you, Mayor. Now on to affordable housing legislation. AB 491 discusses inclusion or unit distribution. And this new law requires that occupants of affordable units in inclusionary units in a market rate building have the same access to those residential building, amenities, public spaces, really, really anything in the building has to be equal in terms of action. And also prohibit isolating affordable units to a floor on a building or a specific area of a building and requires some kind of mix. That mix isn't, there's no standard for that, but in terms of it, it does speak to units, isolated to one floor or a specific area of a floor. So it's really getting that multiple floor distribution. And then it also, it does also have a caveat in the legislation that does speak to development receiving federal or state funding is entitled to waivers of these development requirements. And then SB 728 is related to nonprofits now being able to purchase or sale inclusionary units. So again, a qualified nonprofit housing organization can now actually purchase or sale inclusionary units within a building and bring them under their management and oversee those units. There's part of their nonprofit. And here's a few bills on homelessness, passed in 2021, AB 362 relates to housing shelter health and safety processes. And this is about how it now requires a local agency to follow a specific process. If a complaint is received alleging of standard homeless shelter conditions. But if the city were to see this, there's now a process in place to ensure that those any substandard condition that's reported is alleviated in a timely manner. And that if it's a condition relates to a health and safety hazard that it be ameliorated as soon as possible immediately. And AB 816 is a housing trust fund priority for homelessness. So the state receives federal housing trust fund money for housing projects already. That money is distributed for all sorts of affordable housing project throughout the state. And this bill now states that that money be first prioritized to project serving people experiencing homeless. So it will likely see more state funding going forward. Homeless. Okay. Now on to a student and age related housing legislation. SB290 is a change density bonus ordinance that now allows for low income student housing to receive one additional concession or incentive. If it's a student housing project with at least 20% affordable unit. And SB591 that was one of the more creative bills I've seen in a while. It relates to transition youth in senior housing. And this really establishes a new type of housing called intergenerational housing which allows caregivers and youth aged between 18 and 24 to occupy up to 20% of an affordable senior housing project. There's been a lot of new studies and best practices from Europe and several from the US that show significant benefits to youth and seniors intermixing in one building. And this is one way to get at that at an affordable level. Now on to tenant protections. SB60 gives the city an option to increase fines for illegal short term rentals that aren't up to code. And AB 978 places a rent cap and eviction protections for mobile home resident of no more than 3% plus the cost of living or 5% which whichever is lower in terms of the rent cap. And then there was several housing element requirements that are new this past year. AB 215 relates to public engagement and requires a new public comment period for the first reserve provision of the housing element. So we're starting our housing element process this year. Once we have a first draft of that there will be a specific public process in place for that. There's already intended to be a public process but now there's one that we have to show the state at this specific time in order to meet this new legislation. And then AB 787 relates to the conversion of market rate to affordable housing. Sometimes market rate housing is converted to affordable housing and that previously was not able to be counted towards the regional housing needs allocation or RENA and said, and this legislation now allows those conversions to be counted towards that number at a moderate income level. And then AB 1304 affirmatively furthering fair housing and this requires that the housing element now discuss how the city seeks to address disparities in housing needs and access. So there'll be a new additional section in our housing element discussing this as well. Now on to SB 9. SB 9 is the California Housing Opportunity or Efficiency Home Act. I wanna be very clear that there's currently no state guidance haven't received that yet. We don't know exactly when it might be this spring but there's a number of interpretations to be made with legislation that's large and there's a lot of places where staff planners and attorneys need to make interpretations. What we've really done is talk to as many jurisdictions as possible. I've attended five or six webinars that were statewide. They're led by land use attorney professionals related to this legislation and information from it. Figure out exactly what the requirements of it are. And so through all this work, the city is so far put together an information and process guide which is an attachment in this packet. And then the goal of this is with our best for information to help lead interested community members and applicants, developers through this process and to better understand the legislation and its requirements surrounding it. So that's where we're at right now and it's certainly a living document. Just about every time we talk about it something in it changes a little bit. We've received about 15 interested people. We haven't received an application yet but we have received a number of information requests were reached out to by about 15 interested parties in doing an SB9 project. And they've provided a lot of questions to us as well that have helped take this guide and those questions will continue to take going forward. So by no means is that document attached to static one but it's certainly our best stab at it at this time given all the information out there right now we've been able to do that. And so with that of SB9, there's really two key elements to it. And the first is that it allows two primary residential units on a lot so on for single family to be approved ministerially and it allows an urban lot split on a single family's own plot to be approved ministerially as well. And so those two combine at this time the interpretation is that it's assuming four units total are allowed under this SB9 process if you were to put the lot into two units on each plot or under the current ADU requirements you could still do two primary residential units on single lot but not split as well as two ADUs under the state ADU. So you can kind of do four units either way under this bill. And so with SB9 projects the objective standards apply to a point. There's a number of objective standards in the legislation itself and you can see all those details in our guide and we can certainly talk about them more as well if you have any questions about those standards. But the legislation itself outlines the number of standards minimum lot size, things of that nature. But it does specifically say cities can also use the city of Santa Cruz and use our objective standards as well. For this development but they can only apply so long as we're still allowing at least two residential units of 800 square feet each on a property. So we can preclude that minimum level of development no matter what our standards currently are but we can otherwise use all the objective standards that we have related to single family and house development as well as the objective standards in the legislation itself. And there's a few other areas where the legislation specifically states that their objective standards supersede any other objective standards in a given local agency. And the two big ones there are that the side and rear setbacks be four feet. So that applies across the board regardless of any jurisdictions or in set on development in a single family zone. And then also parking that's near transit or car share and that that's the definition of those two is detailed in the handout that no parking is required if it's near the if it's near transit or car share location no matter how many units you're adding through SB nine. Then SB nine project aren't subject to an environmental quality act. Equal and SB nine does not supersede the coastal act but it doesn't require a public hearing for a coastal development permit. So a project in the coastal zone would still require a coastal development permit but it would also be done just by a stack without a public hearing. So with that some key next step that the city will be working on regarding the SB nine. Like I mentioned before we're going to continue to revise the SB nine guide attached as needed. And what we're working on right now is researching potential ordinance amendments related to SB nine development. And then we're hoping to receive official guidance from the state soon. And at that point we would then develop and then develop draft ordinance amendments for further consideration. So with that, that recommendation is to accept the state of California 2021 land use and housing legislation update. And we're happy to answer any questions. Thank you. Thank you, Matt, for that presentation. Council members questions. We have a couple of hands. Council member Cummings. Mayor, thank you staff for that presentation. I had two pretty brief questions. The first one was on maybe 787 conversion of market rate and it's still affordable housing. I'm just curious what plans and I know this is all new but I'm just curious how the city attends on tracking that because that can help us, especially since tomorrow night handbag we're gonna be making likely our final decision on the new arena allocation numbers. And I'm just curious how we can kind of track this over time to make sure that any market rate or moderate units make that transition to affordable units. Sure to do that in our arena number. We're muted also, by the way. I think Matt, maybe looking at mute button perhaps we could chime in. Sure. So I would expect that in many of those instances the funding to support those conversions will either have come from the city or state or perhaps federal grant. And so through those grants, I would expect that our economic development team, housing group there would become aware of those. I see Bonnie's on the line here. I don't know if she wants to chime in and add anything but that's how I would expect that to happen is that typically, if something is going to deed restricted affordable, there's gonna be public funds associated in order to, for example, complete a rehab with public funds in exchange for those affordability agreement. And in those cases, we would capture that. I guess I'll question on that. How often do we see the tap in, I don't know. I guess since anyone's time working in planning because it just doesn't usually seem like something that will happen to housing. But obviously there's opportunities, so. Yeah, thanks for your patience and sorry about that. My mouse actually disappeared when I left and I couldn't unmute. So with the most common type of this project is when a senior housing, apartment building, some kind. If after 50 years of affordability requirements go away, it becomes market, but sometimes they also go the other way and become affordable, well, but that's typically a transition we've seen and it's happened, I think, a couple times in the last 10 years and our housing division is on top of those transitions because they're tracking all of our affordable housing projects and those and the projects that are becoming affordable. I haven't seen many that go from market rate to affordable, but as Matt mentioned, we do see those projects that go that have the affordability restrictions expiring. And then they take advantage of some of those state funds, extend those affordability restrictions. So I don't think that in those instances, Matt, maybe you'd be able to, well, here's Bonnie, maybe you could answer this, in those instances, I don't think that we would be able to count them if it's deed restricted already and just ended, but I could be wrong there, you know the answer to that or maybe Bonnie. I don't know the answer to that one. I know that there's some discussion about it, but I did want to just jump in and conclude that there's some discussion about it. Just jump in and confirm that we actively monitor the timing of when affordability restrictions or deed restrictions expire, and we're very active in reaching out the ownership of the property management company to see if they are interested and we encourage them and often we'll come back to council with an affordability agreement and potentially even some funding in place to secure that funding affordability infrastructure. Great, thank you. And then more of a comment, I guess I can also bring this in the form of question with 8816, which was the prioritizing federal housing trust fund money projects serving people experiencing homelessness. I'm just, I think it'd be good to attract that. And so I'm just, it'd be good if we could get some information back on like how jurisdictions get access to those funds and what are some of the limitations on those funds? Especially because when we think about our homeless community, there's a lot of, it's a very diverse folks ranging from people who have mental health substance abuse to people who have just been priced out of their homes and are potentially working or living in their cars. And then you also have those people who are kind of on the brink of losing their homes and going homelessness and trying to keep them their homes so be great. As things move forward, we'll kind of track how we get access to those funds to help with all the issues around homelessness that we're trying to address. That's it. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Council Member Cummings. Council Member Brown. Thank you, Mayor Brunner. Thank you. Dan Loft for Director Butler for the overview being a member of that Housing Blueprint Subcommittee that asked that this regularly is great. I really appreciate it. I think it really helps our Council be able to forecast some of the things that might be coming our way. And so we have context to your, the Planning Department conducts its work and brings us changes that are responsive legislation. I just have a couple of questions. One is specific and then the other is more general. So on the specific one, on AB 602, and this was also something we talked about in the Housing Blueprint Subcommittee looking at fees per unit versus kind of the scale of those units, right? So I'm glad to see it here. And I'm just wondering the, it sounds like it would be at the next update, the fee schedule where the would be determined based on square footage rather than by unit, which then doesn't burden unfairly burden higher density, smaller units. It's that's great. How will the city handle that? I imagine we've got a lot of conversing to do about that, but when might we expect to see that? Like, can we just wait until the next update is regular update or will it come as you're able to get it in your, doing your work plan? Is there like a deadline for that? And I guess given that have full cost recovery model, to anticipate, what do you anticipate to try to make sure that we continue to achieve that with the changes that we need? So that's the first one. I'll just ask that first, and then I have a general. Yeah, thanks Council Member Brown. So there is no line for that to be in place. The legislation only speaks to when it's updated as the requirement. Great, thank you. And then, so just in general, I see that with several pieces of legislation here and maybe more details of bills, that there's some options that local jurisdictions can consider. So for example, with us and yes, and the CEQA exemption for 10 units. And then I was thinking also about STVR, the short-term vacation rental fines. So we have the option to do that. Is there consideration of like how the council, what the role of the council will be in making those decisions would you make those changes upon like initiation of requests by council? Will you bring us recommendations for us to consider? At what point will the council involved in deciding whether or not we wanna apply those options? Thanks. I can't speak as much to the short-term rental one. I imagine that would either come from council or a different department. But in terms of the 10 unit CEQA exemption, you know, that's something that council can certainly direct us to do at any time. It's also something that may come up in our conversations around how to meet the arena number in this new housing element. That could be a tool in the toolbox to reach that number that staff may, you know, recommend to council at some point. But it could certainly work either way. And council member Brown, I would add that right now we're in contract with a firm to help us identify short-term rentals that's through our finance department and our enforcement team is working on helping finance move some of those through the process more quickly. The council will recall a couple of instances where owners who hadn't paid their transient occupancy tax were in front of the council. And most of those don't get to the council they pay or but sometimes they do. But one other thing, and so I think it's something that we can look at in combination with those efforts, we can look at whether or not there is a benefit for us to go through that bill's allowances increase the fine. I did look at that it's been a while since I looked at the details of that bill but I think that the DOT, the transient occupancy tax is substantially larger. That's where we're getting that big bang for our buck getting collecting those tax. The one other thing that I wanted to add here is just to reiterate what Matt mentioned before about the SP9 changes. We are anticipating that because of these new lot sizes and because of the allowances on those lots and just some of the objective standards in the SP9 itself, like a four foot rear setback. Looking at that, for example, some other cities are saying, yes, you can have that four foot rear setback but that's only for a single story. And so having that conversation with the community to say, should a second story be setback so that that residence isn't right in somebody's backyard? But there are a number of things that we would be looking at in relation to that. That we do anticipate coming down the process in the near future. After we get the HCD guidelines and we don't have specific direction from the council related to that but because it's coming through those state laws, we do think it's important and we think that there'll be enough community interest in it. Should the council want to give that direction we're happy to accept that because I do think it'll be an important component for us to look at the standards in our subdivision ordinance, what we need to do to modify our local coastal program and then some other things as well, you know, weeks to affordability requirement. Yeah, and I recognize that SB 9 stuff is certainly will be ongoing and you know, a bill like that is more to navigate. Thank you. I do have one other quick question that I just remembered if I could while I have the floor. Somebody asked me to ask related to SB 10 so if we use that as an equate exemption, would that, would it be possible to then remove density from, for example, other parts of town corridors? I mean, I know we're gonna have Rena numbers that kind of suggest that we gotta do a lot more but in theory, since it wouldn't be an overall reduction, is that something that a possibility, is this a mechanism, something like that, is that question clear? Yes, it is clear and Matt's so muted, I'll answer, yes, that would be a possibility in theory, you know, you could take a single family zoned property and allowance for 10 units on there. You know, for example, a buffer around the corridors to create a transition zone, that's something that's been talked about. That said, you would not get the delta of nine given SB nine, we would now have a delta of six because, you know, in most instances, well, I don't wanna say in most instances, in many instances, a allowance of four units on single family properties is now, is now possible, you know. There are a lot of ways where lots and existing development, and existing housing might not allow for that. They might allow for only a duplex but then with that, they could pursue additional ADUs under our current rules. So that's the permutations, those are the permutations that we've been going through as we've been putting together this guide under SB nine. And so just suffice to say yes, potentially but not the full amount of nine. Thank you, and I appreciate you letting me get a little bit into the weeds on this. Thanks everybody for indulging me. Really appreciate the update. Thank you. Remember Brown for those questions. Council Member Calentari-Johnson. Thank you, Mayor, and thank you for the presentation. Very thorough and also easy to digest. So thanks for the breakdown. I was just, I had just a comment, a brief comment. I was really excited to see SB 591, the transitional youth senior housing and just wanted to note that I would love for us to explore any opportunities with that and partner with our county partners that run the transition aid youth program that have housing navigators and smart path assessors dedicated to this effort. So just wanted to make that note. Thank you again for the report and presentation. Thank you. Thank you. Are there any other council member questions? Looks like that's all the questions. So at this time, we will take it out to the public. And it looks like we have a hands up. I will be calling on the first number, phone number ending in 0828. If you press star six, unmute yourself. Then you can speak to this item 18, the State of California 2021 land use and housing legislation update. Go ahead and press star six, unmute yourself. There might be difficulties. Phone number ending in 0828. You have an option to press star six to unmute yourself. If it's not working, you can come back by coming back to you and we'll move to the next hand, which is Garrett P. Yeah, hi, this is Mr. Phillip. Can you hear me? Yes, we can. Thank you. Without an acknowledgement that the so-called housing crisis is actually a government induced affordability crisis, there is no permanent solution possible. You must acknowledge that asset price inflation is the doing of an immoral corrupt government that spends printed money never repaid, which devalues our currency, but then raises the price of everything, including housing. It's not greedy landlords or developers, it's the government full stop. 80% of all government debt was created in the last 20 years while home prices tripled, not a coincidence, blame the federal government and the banking cartel. Beyond that, the affordability gains from density do obey the law of diminishing returns, and it is really construction costs that have the most effect on affordability. SB 9 doesn't address that, nor that zoning is and should be a local issue, nor the fact that mandating ever increasing density is anti-capitalist, anti-liberty, very Agenda 21, and isn't family, community, or quality of life friendly. We already have low, medium, and high density zoning, and high density has the best chance of being affordable. I assume SB 9 would have us believe high density zoning cannot create sufficient affordable housing, that seems false. Now, I could see dividing us apart parcels and units on those half size parcels being something that does allow, if only for a little tiny home ownership, but if home ownership is only required for three years and then can become a rental, I doubt SB 9 accomplishes any more home ownership for very long. It could make sense, it's just another zoning designation in some places and some cities, but not everywhere for all time, doing away with current SFR lots completely, but alas, no, we have news. 12-hundred square foot lot is under the size of three garages, and what used to be three neighbors, now SB 9 can make 11 close by with no part. The suburbs aren't gonna like this, and it's time to do away with Newsom as SB 9 just adds to a long list of his abuse. Nobody except those who live in SFR housing should matter here, and a conversation with those about whether Sanctuary should or should not address the realization of SFR with a directive scanner is not a worry, thank you. Thank you, Garrett B. Okay, I will try again with phone number 0828, press star six and mute yourself. I'm not sure, I'm not hearing anything. There we go. On item 18, the state of California 2021 land use and housing legislation update. That will be next for oral communications. Thank you. Okay, moving on to Rafa Sonnenfeld, stars, thank you. Yes, I've been counsel. First, I'd just like to thank staff for that thorough presentation. I was very informative. In my day job, I consult with city attorneys, planners and the Department of Housing and Community Development on state laws, including SB 9. And I just wanted to commend the city staff for taking a wait and see approach to how SB 9 is going to play out. There are a lot of cities that have rushed making ordinances that we don't think are gonna stand up to legal scrutiny. And I think this city is doing things right by sort of taking time and letting the guidance come out to figure out how, if there are weeks to the existing zoning codes that need to be made. So just a word of caution, if you all are considering an ordinance to implement SB 9, don't use an urgency ordinance for the regular process to approve it. And we believe SB 330 limits the amount of objective standards that can be applied to that. And we're also anticipating HCD to release their guidance hopefully before this in January, February, hopefully by March, I would like to see it out. And we expect HCD guidance to confirm some of what I've said. So thank you all for your work. And I look forward to seeing how all of this it comes together in the coming year. Thank you. Thank you, Rafa Simon-Fellows. Are there any other members of the public that would like to speak to item 18 on our agenda? Seeing none, I will bring it back to council. Is there a motion to accept the state of California 2021 land use and housing legislation update agenda report? Council member Cummings. Go ahead and move this to the report. Here we have motion by council member Cummings and council member Calentari-Johnson. I take it you're muted. There we go, it wasn't working. I was having the same mouse problem. I would second that. We have a second by council member Calentari-Johnson and City Clerk Bonnie Bush, we have a roll call vote please. Council member Calentari-Johnson, member Meyers is absent by Senator Watkins. It brings us to six guest votes, aye votes, and Mayor Meyers absent, motion passes. Thank you. Now is the time in the agenda. We are now at oral communication and for members of the public who are streaming this meeting, this is the time oral communications is an opportunity for members of the community to speak to us on items that were not listed on today's agenda. If you're interested in addressing the council, press star nine on your phone to raise your hand and you will have two minutes. When it's your time to speak, you'll hear an announcement that you have been unmuted. We request that you clearly and slowly state your name before making a comment so that we accurately capture in the meeting minutes, however, it's not required. Please remember, this is a time for council to hear from the public. And with oral communications, we are not able to engage in dialogue with member of the public, but when we are able, we will address the questions raised after oral communications has been completed. So I will now go to Wendy's and thank you for staying with us your phone number ending in 0828. Now is your time to press star six to unmute yourself. I just want to remind everyone that the public park, if everyone in the community is safe place for healthy activities and the placement of unsupervised homeless encampment directly affects children and families, especially in the next cohort. The placement of this camp next to a children's playground, the public baths, soccer fields, create many soccer, create many safety concerns. We heard tonight that we were sure that the encampment is located in the next week and we already other tents popping through the right thing and if our parks for children and the community parks are for playing, please stay at the co-park. Thank you. Thank you for taking the time to call in. The next attendee, Garrett P. A star six. Okay. The thousands of Black Lives Matter supporters like rioters, virtue signalers with $30 BLM yard signs and gullible politicians are hypnotically deceived by the BLM's Marxist anarchist mob narrative that the Black homicide problem is all due to police systemic racism and police defunding as the answer. FBI crime data for 2020 alone indicates the post-ployd tsunami crime wave and murder surge instigated by the BLM police to funding scheme resulted in the largest peer over year increase in Black homicide in US history for an additional 2,905 Black homicide. The narrative of racist motivations causing these executions is almost entirely deception. Two criminal factors at 13.6% of the population is Black but violent Black criminals commit 33% of all violent crime, higher percentage than that for many violent crimes including murder and Black victims are overwhelmingly done in by Black criminals. Criminal Black homicide by police and truth is a microscopic factor. Believing in absence of absolute police perfection justifies the resulting anarchy of a police defunding for the advocacy of a normalization of violence or is that a stacking of only 2020s resulting additional dead Black bodies never mind the thousands of others would extend from sea level to 1,100 feet above the highway 17 summit. 2021 will be worse. Black Lives Matter is an anarchist and homicidal criminals wet dream. The BLM's inflammatory racial victim ideology police defunding has caused this vastly increased criminal mayhem is now panicking the due politicians to restore police budget. The BLM is not for justice or reckoning me come that it is the BLM's doing that has inflamed this new excessive criminal violence and Black homicide, not racism, not police. Police save lives by separating violent criminal chaos from the people. BLM cult worshiping is creating more crime and death. That increases criminal leniency similarly pairs with its alarming primary ranking it among the most unsafe of California city. The BLM speak about white supremacy bogeymen but allow a permanent glorification symbol of the BLM world called anarchy which will normalize the crimes of arson, fluid and murder. Thank you. Thank you for calling in. That concludes oral communications and that concludes our meeting for today. Thank you so much. Have a wonderful evening and this meeting is adjourned. Thank you Mayor Brunner. Thank you very much. Thank you very much everybody.