 The hour of 1 30 having arrived we will call to order this meeting of the Santa Cruz City Council clerk Please call the roll. Thank you mayor council member is newson president Brown here Whatkins here Brunner present Helen Torrey Johnson present vice mayor golder here and mayor keely here A quorum having been established. We will move forward on our agenda What we're going to do at this point is take Public comment on any item that is on our closed session agenda. So this is your opportunity. We have Given you five minutes on this Ms. Rowe Good afternoon Well, as you know, my name is Nancy here row. I'm a 70 year old widow On social security and I live at 2 11, Travis A gentleman came out to Change out my meter Came to my door and disappeared And another gentleman came out from the city and said that I had a major Water leak under my rocks as my water well bill was very high And he said I should fix it as soon as possible as not to inter More money And then um I called the people to come out and do it. He did tell me it would be between eight and nine thousand dollars, which he was correct in that Um, and I had bellows come out They dug an unnecessary trench Looked at my pipes. They were fine and the gentleman from bellows went to my water meter And cleaned it out and discovered The leak was on the city side Um, it was during the storms. So that's when he did that He said my pipes were fine No problem there Okay, and then um They then uh They refilled the trench You know and meanwhile I was waiting for a smart meter to come in And it finally came in And of course it was that I had absolutely no leaks and um This process took six weeks And my sister and I usually sit on the front front porch So she was with that me when all this stuff was said And you know, it's not fun to look at a French in my porch porch so, uh Yeah, and then um, you know, I I finally had to you know, they did the trench in And my concern is that I took out a loan to do this which I am on social security. So Quite a bit of hardship to pay another bill so, uh to pay interest on it and uh, you know For unnecessary trench But I did not have to do I don't know where it Followed through got lost in the city I could tell you the names of the people But I don't want to do that because I don't believe in embarrassing people in a public forum It's in my paperwork and now my pictures are in my paperwork and um My sister was helping me because I Don't I'm not good at this stuff You're doing just fine Okay, so um, you know, I just uh, a lot of money And I you know, I just feel like the fault was not mine I was told several times under the rocks under the rocks under the rocks. So, um I really thank you for your time. It let me kind of concise my big long So, um, yeah, I would like to be reimbursed obviously Um, and I would like to know the procedure after this Fine Miss row. Thank you very much. Uh, we will be discussing this matter in closed session in a few minutes Okay, uh, and then the city attorney will be in contact with you regarding Any action we may take on this matter. Okay. Thank you so much for being here Didn't my sister come out now Oh, I've lived in my house for uh, 45 years Actually to tell you I've never had a problem like this before. Okay Thank you, miss row. We appreciate your presence here today Anyone else who is with us today Wish to comment upon our closed session agenda Miss bush. Is there anyone online? No one online. No one else last call The city council will stand in recess. We're going to excuse me, sir. Mr. Mayor Um, I I sent an email to the council earlier this morning Um, I would like to request that we add a subsequent need to hide them Okay, we may make a statement about it. Please. Thank you. Just going back to miss rows comments Um, I would expect she would be in contact with the risk manager risk manager. Excuse me. That's right His name is ross brandon Yeah, uh, the risk manager his name is ross brandon and you can expect to hear from him after the council Meets in closed session I'm requesting that the council add an existing litigation item to the closed session as an item of subsequent need The case is entitled alliance for Hippocratic medicine Versus the united states food and drug administration It's pending in the united states court of appeals for the fifth Circuit on appeal from a district court decision in, uh, texas the fda Is appealing a decision that Made by a district court judge that atlawed the use of mythoprestone, which is commonly used for um abortion and miscarriage related procedures um The need for the action is that it came to my attention yesterday after the agenda was posted uh, and the um Amicus brief that's being filed is going to be filed at 3 p.m. Today, and so it's necessary to add this as subsequent need Added I'm so moved to add that item motion by council member Watkins second by council member Golder is there a debate or discussion? Seeing and hearing none the clerk will call the roll Council member newson. Hi brown. Hi Watkins. Hi fruner. Hi Calentary johnson. Hi vice mayor golder. Hi and mary keely. Hi motion Council's order and is added to our closed session agenda We now stand in recess to closed session Thanks Recording stopped Are required to be considered and that's not the case in care court and then in care court there's a role cut out for um for a supporter and Um, and miss rogers will talk a little bit about what that role is So in terms of what a credible petition is going to be We know that the criteria are you have to be 18 years of age or older You have to have schizophrenia spectrum disorder or another psychotic disorder And that this is going to have to be documented through an affidavit of a licensed behavioral health care clinician Or evidence that the respondent was detained for a minimum of two intensive treatments under code 52 50 And one one of those most recently in the past 60 days And so only if a petition is is credible would a care court process begin Uh, there are two other sort of key criteria that clients have to meet So one of the following that either they would be Unlikely to survive and deteriorating Or that they would likely become government dependents as outlined in welfare and institution code 51 50 Um in terms of the implementation schedule, uh, Nicole mentioned that there's a phase statewide implementation Seven counties will be starting and are currently ramping up their care court operations to Begin in october of this year Los angeles county will also join those seven counties in december of this year And then in december of 2024 The remaining 50 counties will will be expected to have a operating care court There are some procedures Where whereby counties may be able to extend for up to a year to december 2025 But those would most likely be only under certain emergency conditions The other thing that we're monitoring are lawsuits that may impact implementation of care court Apparently there's one case before the state supreme court Where groups are arguing to strike down the entire act Um arguing that it needlessly burdens sort of fundamental rights to privacy and self determination And so as those progress either through the superior through the state supreme court Or gets kicked down to the lower courts. Those are those are cases that we'll be monitoring Um and to talk up a little bit more about what the process might look like I'm going to turn it over to our public defender heather rogers Miss rogers. Good afternoon. Welcome to the council chambers. Good afternoon, mayor It's nice to see you and it's nice to see the rest of you as well. I'm very happy to be here So care court the process will go to the next slide I have to be really honest with you and tell you we're all guessing This is a brand new court. We've never had anything like this in the state We've never had anything like this in santa cruz county So some of our cohorts who are laura's lodge jurisdictions Actually already have assisted outpatient treatment courts And they have a little bit more of a blueprint of what this might look like So I will do my best today to give you my best guess based on what we do know about how this will look for our clients and constituents So once that petition is filed and it does have to meet these certain criteria The court has to evaluate whether there's an initial showing that care may be appropriate The petition has to have with it either an affidavit of a clinician which lays out the criteria and the reasons why someone needs care Or evidence that someone has been detained under Well for an institution codes 52 50 for 14 days of intensive treatment at least twice And one of those incidents has to have occurred in the last 60 days And so the goal here is to get people into care court who are in crisis, right? If folks are stable, we don't need another process to subject them to this is for those people who aren't stable The petition can be filed by community members. They have to meet certain criteria They have to have a relationship to the client So for example somebody who lives with a person can file a petition A roommate a family member can file a petition a clinician or a provider can file a petition Or a first responder can file a petition including a law enforcement officer The petition again has to have all of that supporting documentation. It goes to the court The court assesses whether there's an initial showing If there is an initial showing the court reaches out to county behavioral health And asks the county to do an evaluation a clinical evaluation That evaluation gets filed with the court And at that point the care court team comes together at that initial hearing The public defender gets appointed to represent the client The client can choose a care supporter Somebody from their network who they want to have there. It can be anybody Representatives from county behavioral health join that team And in addition the participant can invite family members or friends there It's a confidential proceeding. So it's not like this where anyone can walk in It's dealing with someone's mental health Intimate facets of their life that we don't want open to the public But the participant themselves can choose who's there Once everyone is assembled and the participant has counsel That's when we start working out a care plan So behavioral health will chime in on what that should look at My team will chime in with the input of our client The client will chime in the supporters will chime in And a care agreement or a care plan will be hashed out that everyone can look at and say this makes sense to us The plans are expected to last for about 12 months for about a year During that time there will be periodic reviews every 60 days to see how the participant is doing And my team will be a part of those reviews to make sure that at every step of the way The person who's receiving care understands their rights and responsibilities After a year the team gets back together to see how the person is doing Care can be extended for an additional 12 months for a total of two years If everyone agrees to do that Care is voluntary This is not a situation where there is a penal consequence for not participating in care court You can't be imprisoned or jailed or fined for not participating in care court And so participant buy-in will be a critical piece of this process At the end of the day what we're hoping is that people get through care court They get some skills They get their medication stabilized They have a supportive network and at that point county behavioral health Will continue to work with that person to provide supportive services housing support Whatever they need to be successful and not end up there again Next slide please The rights that our clients have in care court are very similar to the rights they have in criminal court They have the right to a notice of all care hearings. They have the right to be present at all care hearings They have the right to counsel. They have the right to a public defender They have a right to a supporter They can have friends and family present at their discretion They have the right to present evidence the right to cross examine and confront witnesses The right to an appeal and the right for the entire proceeding including the care record to be completely confidential And with that I'll pass the mic back to miss coburn. Thank you Thank you. Ms. Rogers. Ms. Coburn So as you can imagine And next slide The housing is going to play a critical role with care court One key piece of care court and care plans is Identifying housing so that clients are stabilized and they're connected to treatment This could look a variety of different ways. It may mean that We're going to need bridge housing clinically supported housing licensed settings for both adults and seniors This could mean permanent supportive housing And in some cases it would continue to look like housing with family or friends depending on if They have people in their lives who can provide that sort of housing So it's going to take on a variety of different looks in terms of providing this as part of the the care plans The state has been taking this seriously and Since 2021 as you probably are aware they've been Working on investing more and more funds out of the state budget into housing that provides a treatment element In the current year budget the state has set aside 1.5 billion for behavioral health bridge housing That specifically prioritizes care participants And staff within our behavioral health department as well as our housing for health division Are actively looking at the application for this which is due later this month and trying to figure out They do intend to apply. It's just a matter of what the application looks like Um in 2024 You may have heard the governor is looking at A general obligation bond in the range of three to five billion dollars That would specifically provide housing with a behavioral health component in residential settings This may take on different forms But for all of these different options that are becoming available to us This is an area where I think cities are going to have a role in helping to Site and build housing that would help support not only care participants But others within our community that need these services Next slide So I just wanted you've already heard some of the challenges that are starting to emerge As we've been having this presentation But one um that's um critical to keep in mind is that Care court is very narrowly focused And not everyone realizes that it's very it's focused on people with Schizophrenic spectrum or other psychotic disorders who meet these specific criteria So uh, we just wanted to call that out as something to keep in mind because it really narrows The population we're talking about The governor's administration estimates that eligible clients could range between 7 000 and 12 000 When you look at the county population as a percentage of the state population This could mean um only 50 to 90 clients within our county might be eligible based on this criteria And then as another metric we also looked at the governor's estimate in comparison to The county's homeless population as a percent of the state homeless population And that is a slightly higher number that could mean between 100 and 170 clients But when you think about that in comparison to the number of homeless that we've identified through our counts You know, that's still a small percentage of that 2,500 to 3,000 number. So um, it's it's a it's a much smaller number than than those might realize Another challenge as we've been mentioning is just the petition process You know, this is going to be a barrier to entry In terms of getting into care court because it's those specific people is identified in the legislation That could petition for someone to get into court and it has to be supported by an affidavit of a behavioral health clinician Specifically in most cases And then there are just administration challenges I mentioned the difficult to project numbers that is impacting our planning as a county in terms of The numbers of county staff. We're going to need to devote to care court We have the public defender who's going to be involved. We have our behavioral health department Which is a huge component of this County council is also Going to play a key role in terms of representing the county And there are others as well. So this is impacting us in terms of thinking through how we're going to implement care court We also can't force clients to show up. You heard heathers say that this is a voluntary process And so there's some logistical things with getting clients engaged and having them appear through the petition process And then the court process and timelines are still being being developed. So Those could have an impact just on implementation And you know, this is going to shift as we learn from those pilot counties Regarding their implementation and we're really looking towards them to see how the rollout goes Next slide Um, so just to highlight our care court implementation team. We have Numerous county departments involved in this you can see them all listed here We also have our county partners both within the cities of santa cruz and watsonville As well as our private bar And private attorneys and watsonville law center and the superior court which will play a role We've been meeting quarterly so far. We just had a meeting in march And we're planning to move to more frequent meetings in the fall as we start to get more information from the pilot counties and really ratchet up our implementation plans This you know, we're we've chosen to include both internal county departments and our city partners because we're all in this together in terms of figuring out The protocols behind care court and we're really committed to sharing ownership of what happens here And doing this in a trauma-informed culturally responsive way And so with that, um, we're happy to answer your questions or try to Depending on what those are We're still as we've all kind of noted still figuring this out First of all, thank you all three of you very very much. We appreciate that. I know We appreciate the notion that we are very very early in this and Which is one of the reasons we were so pleased when you accepted our offer to come over here and talk about it because we do believe that in so many ways were Clearly implicated in this in terms of of an overall program Let me before I ask my questions. Let me go to miss bruner Your questions. Have your microphone up Um, thank you so much and thank you for the slides and the information. I think you know as we, um Have constituents and and members of the public and our community members and Our people who work in the city live in the city and we are tasked with a lot of policy decisions and we've been really working on housing decisions and Always along the way care courts comes up in those discussions um, and It's been very helpful Um to read through a lot of the data and to understand even more I didn't realize how narrowly focused of a demographic it would serve and So I feel like I've learned a lot to date even though we still don't know a lot and I Can hear and understand What you're working with all the unknowns it makes it challenging to plan How this will all lay out. Um, I'm hopeful for You know some of the the Programs and fundings and solutions that are coming out to try and support Um Members of our community and even though it is a narrow focus Hey, those are 50 to 90 more people That could potentially be supported in that decision making process. So I think that's a win. Um, and um, I think as I would really Love to stay up to date. Let's say, you know over the course of the year as things unfold um, I think it's really helpful for us in understanding how we can support I heard something about citing and and Housing I know that we have permanent support of housings a couple of developments getting built um that You know having that partnership so my questions are I saw on your partner list city of capitol and scott's valley were not listed and i'm just curious about that They are definitely a partner of ours I think it has more to do with a bandwidth issue and you know, we started off with the larger cities in terms of having more time and ability to engage with us early on but We of course are happy to collaborate with them and will include them as well going forward Okay, that was my guess. I just wanted to make sure and um Also, um In terms of This process You said it was new nothing has been like this and I know there are other demographics That could really benefit from this type of process of support and community-based self determination um, you know, we've had the discussions about conservatorship and incarceration and Really getting to the core health and human services Support of whatever the needs are so are there other And you don't have to answer if you don't know but um demographics that um, is there count work on the county side to service other demographics for In this process Yeah, my understanding is um, obviously there's other democrat graphics out there that need similar services in terms of behavioral health and substance use disorder needs Um, and you know, we're actively working on ways to expand those services in coordination with you know Housing and what that looks like to stabilize folks. Um, I believe the governor's administration is also looking at ways That they can further expand and invest in additional services. So I think that's going to be ongoing and um, you know, we're happy to come back and report on on anything else that Ends up getting implemented in the future Okay, that's Just add a little bit on that. So the care population that we project to be serving is very similar to the population that we serve now as public defenders There's a lot of overlap in our community between people who are suffering from mental health disorders and substance use disorders And people who get system involved and so at the public defender's office. We are definitely looking at other demographics, right? We are heavily pursuing mental health diversion options restorative justice in partnership with our da's office We are um, you know, implementing a community-based whole person defense model that includes social workers and advocates And so we're hoping that with all of these different solutions that really go upstream to try to address root causes That we'll be able to wrap around more of the folks who really need our help I think for me The um, the gist of care court that I think we all need to be really cognizant of Is our jails are not the place to be treating folks who are suffering from mental illness and the criminal legal system is not The place for that either. So I know that our county partners our city partners Really, everyone in this community understands that and is committed to the long-term solutions Care court is just a piece of that but we are always open to ideas at public defender for doing better in that regard Thank you. That's really hopeful To hear and um, I hope to stay connected in In in hearing more about that Thank you Thank you councilmember Watkins Well, yeah, thank you for the presentation and I know it's early on so but it was helpful to hear um councilmember bruner got at my questions around I think just like the the collaborative court model and that continuum of Services and interventions and touch points along the way um I'm obviously there's concern with a voluntary program like this. I think if somebody is Um, demonstrating psychotic and schizophrenic behaviors to have a voluntary Participation seems like an even smaller population even if they're eligible I don't know if you have thoughts on that but if you're already at that level, I would automatically assume that Somebody might not necessarily volunteer to do this. I don't know if you guys want to speak to that more It's interesting. I've thought a lot about this People also don't really volunteer for restorative justice or mental health diversion This is another tool in our toolkit for diverting people out of the system. And so by way of example We may have folks who are arrested The da takes a look at the um initial report and says what we have here is someone who needs treatment not incarceration And they're now going to have an option To call me and say I want you to reach out to this person Where someone's filing a care court petition, whether it be, you know, law enforcement or somebody who cares about them We don't want them to be system involved, but the elements of the crime are And so there are a lot of like I said, there's so much overlap And I feel there are a lot of ways that we can use this To divert cases that we really know need more intensive treatment The other thing that happens at the end If someone does not engage in voluntary treatment and is is still doing poorly Is we have our conservatorship options still available And so care court gives a person who's on the cusp of that A chance for a little more support and self-determination If that makes sense totally yeah Yeah does I appreciate you framing it that way because you know having been part of restorative justice programming There is also the other option right the other option being oh you go into probation or you have a traditional type of Outcome, but if you don't have that other option, I think that that would be the concern of just a pure voluntary Program, so I really appreciate that explanation Um, I guess my other last question At this time is in terms of like the co-occurring Members of our community who are displaying behaviors that are schizophrenic like or psychotic But also are using substance abuse or substance misuse Where do they fit into that spectrum? I'm assuming it's probably a similar response as you've already provided in terms of the options But I see that as something that's sort of this overlap and difficulty of is it a substance use? Psychosis that's kind of generated from that space or is it actually truly a mental health? Challenge and it's been a challenge in identifying for service Or any insights, yeah I mean we confront this every day in the criminal courts right when we're trying to understand whether someone qualifies for mental health diversion Is a good candidate whether this is someone who needs medication or somebody who just needs to detox And I don't think anything about the care court model is going to make that process easier At some point a clinician is going to have to make the call right that this is a schizophrenia Spectrum or psychotic disorder rather than a symptom of of drug use These are tough calls. Okay. Yeah. Okay. That makes sense. All right. I think those are all my questions at this time. Thank you Thank you councilmember councilmember callantari johnson. Thank you Thank you so much for the presentation and for being here and the work that you do in the community um I I have a number of questions. I'm going to try to synthesize and and Not ask all of them so that my colleagues can have a chance I'm really glad heather that you brought up that we have existing programs and resources that we can leverage cafes program comes to mind as a way to Kind of braid what we have in place and then use care court as an augmentation um, and and we have a lot of Demand at the county in the city. So I'm just wondering How the county is managing prioritizing The planning of preparing for care court and then when it gets to implementation implementation It's maybe a hard question to answer but given all of our demands. How are we prioritizing this? Yeah, we've um just started decided to start early so we've already had a couple meetings of our implementation team and Initially, we thought, you know quarterly would be enough To kind of start this workout like I mentioned we're planning to meet more frequently in the fall We're really waiting to get more information from the pilot counties And learn more about the lawsuit and how that proceeds which might guide some of our implementations. So We've taken this very seriously and obviously we want to be successful and don't want to incur any penalties from Not implementing or having to ask for a delay from the state. So I think we'll be well positioned to implement by december 1st of 2024 And you know the next year a year from this fall, you know, we'll really ratchet up the time we spend with it Okay, you hit a bunch of other questions. I had so I want to ask those Okay, um, you you guys talked about citing and how important citing is and that's where Cities and other partners can come in support What is the county doing now to get an early start on citing and are we using the county's housing element process to identify potential sites for These residential services Yeah, the um, like I mentioned staff are already looking at sites that the county might have that would be potentially Could be used as part of a behavioral health bridge housing project The housing element is a really good example of something that is Starting to happen that is going to be critical To identifying places where we might cite additional housing specifically related to this clientele and others so The we we have a public process. We're going to go through that involves various individuals and community partners to help us identify those sites and As well as a series of Outreach and meetings that will be held. So Hopefully we can through that process we can come up with A plan for where we might put all of these facilities Okay, great. I think just two more questions Um So the other piece of this that we have to prepare for is the staffing of it Making sure that we have the clinicians to do the assessments effectively and efficiently and then the care supporters um Is there an opportunity with what's happening with cal aim and uh community health workers Across the state and what we're doing at the county level to To think about workforce development in that way or what are we doing around workforce development? And that may be an opportunity That could definitely be an opportunity. Um, cal aim is also a big initiative That is currently in the planning process that we're working towards trying to implement And um, they're very well may be an opportunity to expound the number of providers and people Working in our community to provide these types of services And I know um, both header and spend have been involved in the cal aim implementation side of things too So I don't know if either of you have anything else to add, but okay, great last question So we would love to be a supportive partner. Like you said, we're all in this together We benefit from a successful program. I heard very clearly that the governor is allocating some funds towards this What can we as a city do to show the great need? I think our need is greater than a lot of other cities that are like us What can we do to help you show the need so that we can acquire those dollars? And maybe you can think about that and let us know Yeah, we're happy to get back to you with any thoughts we have. Um, there is an application open right now So we're going to be applying for those and um, I'm sure that stuff would reach out If we needed any letters of support to go along with our applications But we can get back to you if there are additional ways Obviously advocacy at the state level for additional funds and all of these areas is critical So, you know bills or funding tied to both housing and behavioral health services is always appreciated Thank you so much All right Again, thank you for your presentation. Is there a judge in these things? Is there a judge in this court? Is it one of our existing members of the bench? Do we get a new Judge in the county? What what is the arrangement with managing the judiciary's calendar on this? There's going to be a judge We don't get a new judge and so we'll have to use the resources we have But we are envisioning a whole new courtroom with a new process a new defense team with social workers advocates an investigator a defender It's a whole new thing The only person who won't be in that room is a prosecutor because it's not criminal Is there a Aside from the potential capital outlay of a general obligation bond Is there a funding stream in reading the bill? It didn't look like there was a Either a funding stream nor an appropriation in the bill No, there's the 1.5 billion for behavioral health bridge housing in the current fiscal year There is money's tied to implementation, but it's not enough It's not going to fund our public defender our county council our behavioral health department and servicing these clients so At this moment, it's pretty much an unfunded mandate and we're anticipating That we're going to have to set aside general fund money to help support this effort and we're making plans for that But we'll continue to advocate at the state level to help support our departments in serving these clients Let me ask this question I want to go to this You showed the partners on there and The notion of scott's valley and capitol. They're very small jurisdictions. Certainly They're not immune to the issue of folks having These kinds of experiences in their life whether they're unhoused or not It is less apparent in those communities perhaps But it is not at zero So How do you I want to pursue this question of the four cities and the county so that Our city or the county government is not Being asked to do more than their fair share So we have two other cities and I'm wondering how Either the county or some entity is Going to catch them in the net as well Yeah, I think you know, we're going to continue to communicate with them and Rhetorate the importance of them being Playing a role in in the implementation process Like I mentioned previously, we just started with the larger jurisdictions, but obviously this impacts everyone and there would be clients across the county potentially Let's assume a fact not in evidence yet, which is that the Governor and the legislature placed the bond measure on the ballot and then the voters approve it And the wiring instructions in this bond measure Are for what capital outlay purposes? The as far as I've read so far it's For housing but with a treatment focus So they're really looking towards Funding or meeting the the gap and I think it's 600 treatment beds that they've estimated that We need across the state of california. So it's really housing with a behavioral health treatment focus and it Could take different forms, you know, it might look like a variety of different types of housing And hopefully if it were to pass our county could You know get a sizable amount of those funds to help fulfill our needs When I had the great privilege of serving the legislature Anytime a statewide number got thrown out the way we looked at it and At least in my office was that santa cruz county would get 1 of And I think the ceo's office has oftentimes used that sort of windage An elevation survey number So if they say it's 20 billion dollars, we say what's 1 percent of that? That's what we're likely to get is is that essential because of the the population of our county and And the needs issues inside that is that roughly what you're looking at? Yeah, we haven't even um, you know, that's possible that it might be close to 1 percent But we haven't even seen or received any sort of allocation of what that looks like for our county Hopefully we would have an opportunity through seasack and Those who advocate for us, you know to help Figure out how we could maximize our allocation Let's assume this also for a second discussion that Whether it passes or doesn't pass whether there's a bond measure and it passes done pass Let's set that aside for just a second so We are we're here in the city of santa cruz. We're Trying to do our fair share and maybe a little bit more when it comes to issues around folks Very serious challenges in their life and especially folks who are experiencing homelessness Absent a State bond or other capital outlay funding source from the state government. I suspect the county is Not going to put a general obligation bond on the ballot To fund the capital outlay side of this would that be fair? We haven't made any decisions regarding whether or not to put a general obligation bond on the ballot We're currently trying to pursue any sorts of grants or other applications that are currently available And we would take a look at whether, you know, some sort of tax measure would make sense in the future In the event that The state doesn't either place a bond measure on the ballot or the voters rejected And in the case that the county Does or doesn't put a bond measure on the ballot and it fails Is the local government then continuing to be obligated under this to provide somehow the capital outlay to meet the residential needs and other capital capital outlay needs Or is there some If if the state won't do it the county won't do it the city won't do it On the capital outlay side, what what does this program then do? Yeah, I think we'd have to take a look at what that means at that point and get back to you I'm I'm honestly, I'm not sure what entirely that would mean housing is a Key component of a care plan so if there is no housing We'd have to figure out what that means And I think that that in a sense because of the rena allocation and the way that it Uh, We're going to need housing And that should definitely be the focus of all of our jurisdictions is how we can bridge this gap Not only because of care court, but because it's the right thing to do for our community members Right And I think that that in a sense because of the rena allocation and the way that it Uh, does segment across income lines that We will be Whether it's the county of the city or the other three cities in the county Uh, we will be submitting our housing elements of our general plan to the department of housing community development for approval Is there as far as you know, is there any degree to which Hcd Is going to be looking at this in the context of approving housing elements I haven't heard anything discussed specifically related to that component But happy to take that, you know back with us and if we do hear something get back to you. Thank you. Thank you Councilmember golder. Oh, thank you I have quite a few questions still on my list, but if you can't answer all of them Maybe we could get a report back or something at some point So I just was wondering and if you don't know, uh, how many how many beds there are currently in the unincorporated areas of the county for Bridge or for permanent supportive housing We would get back to you. Okay. Perfect. Okay. Thank you And then since we all know early intervention is key would minors specifically teens that are suffering Be eligible for this process No, I think the criteria it's 18 and older. So you'd have to be an adult. So wouldn't be minors My next question is at some point you mentioned unlikely to survive Can you tell me more what that means like in legal terms? Maybe I don't I think that came up when miss coburn was talking about the legal challenges To to care court. Is that the context? No, it was like somebody that was unlikely to survive as a criteria Somebody who's deteriorating to the point where they could no longer care for themselves And so care court is really the the bridge that you pass before you get to a conservatorship, right? Where somebody is having decisions made for them And so I think I mean I'm thinking in terms of For example, if someone's able to like feed themselves like by eating out of the trash, like Is that likely to survive? That's what I that makes sense. Is that likely? That is not a bar to care court as long as they have the other criteria And so a schizophrenia spectrum or psychotic disorder The Unlikely to survive element of the plan is simply we're trying to target those people Who are right on the edge of a more serious and pervasive intervention You know people who are really teetering on either a conservatorship or doubling down on system involvement Because their behaviors are becoming such that it's difficult for them to manage without an intervention Um, and then you did say that it's there's other site psychiatric disorders are Substance use disorder or bipolar disorder on that list. Are there what are other psychiatric disorders that are on the list aside from schizophrenia Or is it just psychotic disorder? So schizophrenia spectrum or psychotic disorder is how the the statute reads. It's very narrow So I feel that the populations that you're talking about We're going to have to look at our other tools in our toolkit to keep them out of the system and to get them supportive services okay, um And then I'm just wondering and maybe bernie knows but this one, but you vaguely touched on this about about Like numbers, but in do we have any idea of what terms? um I mean, there's some people you have regular contact with what what percent of the homeless population out there I mean, there's from police contacts or something like that more specifically. No, okay And then my my my last question when you're on that partners page I didn't catch it but was was dignity pam for kaiser on there. They were on there all three of them They weren't on there No, those the what was listed on that slide was just our internal county departments and then our city jurisdictions, but the health care providers Obviously if we need to work with them, we would need to include them as well And I I guess I just don't know how someone gets those big hospitals get the contracts in the county But it seems like as a condition for them operating I would hope that they would be willing partners in writing at least the um Temporary beds or something like that in some way or some sort of clinical support um And then I guess that Does conclude my questions everybody else ask my other ones. Thank you very good Again, thank you so very much for being here. Let me give an opportunity for just a second If you'd have a seat right there, let me just see if anybody wishes to comment on the presentation that's been made today I know I know we're done. We're okay Good afternoon Good nap Good afternoon everybody. It's nice to be here Great to see you. Tony I wasn't expecting to be able to comment on this subject, but I took about two pages of notes and so I'm not quite sure where this group is getting all their information But it seems like there's a great deal more of information available Um, and I'll start with something that uh, the previous police chief Andy Mills wrote about two months ago um, they are It's kind of focusing on the homeless and talking about the individuals that they're having particular problems with with in the future to pass legislation To isolate those individuals and if that ever comes to pass People who speak publicly Like myself are also targeted. We're all targeted But as far as you know shooting from the hip and all this information is new I would like to disagree had I known about this subject. I would have brought a bunch of information with me. That's in my truck um There's been a Psychological and physical and educational control going on for quite some time. I mean I could go back to the recent past Information that Brock Chisholm started to disseminate in 1946 And if you look at that information it describes exactly what's going on now Brock Chisholm was the first inspector general of the un from 1948 to 1953 Now in kind of changing the subject I could go on we could go with why the league of nations was Started and talk about colonel house's work or we could go back even further I guess before I changed the subject I'll say that diets affected human beings where it's well documented for more than 150 years Even 20 years ago. I was listening to information of how people who have been categorized with schizofrenic That their situations could change by changing their diet now to move forward and bring it more into what's going on in this county I had a friend that for whatever reason made some mistakes and got herself a 51 50 You know what happened with the santa cruz? deputies what happened with whatever that hospital was and then She went somewhere else and then she was at telecare, you know I think it is really important for people to have the ability to have people to speak for them and I know that I was there and I had several recorded conversation with with deputies that were very helpful And I was actually in in telecare And got verbal stuff over the phone where I could have access to the records And the people said no and I called the sheriff's deputies to in telecare And went down and filed another report. So what happened to my friend was very sad and I think that Um, I know that everybody here has the best of intentions I know that the public defenders by the 22 23 is a new area and they have a Budget of about almost nine million dollars because I was there doing the budgetary hearings So that's enough. I didn't think I was going to speak on this, but it's nice to see you all Thank you very much So let me conclude this by I do have someone online. Let's go ahead Good afternoon three two One Okay, not happening Let me again. Thanks the county representatives and miss rogers the public defender for being here We really do appreciate being in this conversation early with you It I think you can see by the nature of the questions from the members of the council that this is Right in one of those areas that is a a very high priority set of challenges for our city and My personal view is that The legislation is very much a step in the right direction I Read the legislative record on this and there was no small amount of controversy as this bill moved its way through the legislature and I think it took Some no small amount of courage for the legislature and the governor to enact this bill And I do believe that if we continue to work as partners in this that that we can avail ourselves of a new tool that I think when we walk around and We see folks with You know they're having enormous challenges simply living in the moment on our streets That Some way for some of those folks to get some relief From the pain that is their lives is is a very positive thing for us to do So thank you all three of you so very very much for being here we're going to To move on here We are on presiding officer announcements. I have none Statements of disqualification. I would ask any council member who has a statement of disqualification on items on the agenda do so at this time Seeing and hearing none We will proceed Are there additions and leations to our agenda miss bush? There are not no there are not This is the opportunity for the city attorney to make any appropriate reports out of our closed session today Mr. Kandadi good afternoon, sir Good afternoon, mayor keely and members of the city council this afternoon the council met at 1 30 p.m in the courtyard conference room to discuss the following items of closed session business First before adjourning to closed session the council voted to add as an item of subsequent need A pending litigation matter in a case entitled alliance for Hippocratic medicine at all versus us food and drug administration That's a case currently pending in the us federal court of appeals for the fifth circuit And in that case the council voted unanimously to authorize the city to join With other cities and counties throughout the country in an amicus brief filed this afternoon In support of the FDA's appeal of a texas district court judges decision That imposed a nationwide ban on the use of mitha pressed stone Which is a medication that was approved by the FDA over 20 years ago as a safe and effective drug That's used by millions in the united states to terminate an unwanted or unsafe pregnancy or to treat miscarriages The amicus brief highlights the shared interests and responsibility of local governments in protecting The health and safety of our residents including access to essential health care such as reproductive health Items that were on the agenda That's posted our conference with legal council concerning liability claims the claims of nancy p row And the claim of precision grade ink Those are also listed this afternoon on your consent calendar as agenda item eight Council also met with a legal council to discuss one item of significant exposure to litigation It also met with its real property negotiators to discuss real property negotiations Concerning the property at three three three locust street Which is adjacent to the city hall complex on this block There was no reportable action on any of those items Mr. Ghandari, thank you very much for that We're on item five. This is the opportunity to review the calendar or say anything you'd like to bring to our attention miss bush I have a calendar Very good. Thank you. We are on the consent agenda For those of you unfamiliar with the process items six through 14 inclusive will be voted on One vote we will take all of those items together Let me first go to the council and see if members would like to Either comment on or pull an item Please I have a comment on item 15 the second reading and final adoption of ordinance number 2023-05 amending the Santa Cruz municipal code chapter 9.90 AB 481 military equipment use And um make council member that that is not part of the consent agenda. That's uh Item 15 is the first public hearing Thank you I do not have a comment on the consent agenda Certainly I'm jumping ahead in my agenda here and of course it's under public hearings. So I have a comment when we get to item 15 You will be recognized don't you worry about that All right, uh for the comments on agenda items six through 14 Anyone with us today wish to comment on items any of those items six through 14. Good afternoon, sir Yes, good afternoon You know we're all doing the best we can life doesn't happen To you it happens for you. So I want to make comments on the consent agenda item meter replacement project You know what is there in 23,000 meters were replaced When I kind of joke and I'm kind of serious. I was taking care of some stuff out of friends And lo and behold this book appeared. It's called just say no to big brother's smart meters So this goes into a fair amount of detail Uh, I'm not sure when this book was published, but I think it was about 2010 Um, I'm going to mention city ordinance against smart meters for watsonville Where they passed an amendment where they stopped that for one year, but that was more than 10 years ago. Um So The issue is here and it kind of has to do with did the public really ask for these things and what are all these things actually doing And not that I would recommend anybody do this But there's a water filtration system that anybody can use it Magnetically polarizes your water if you put it too close to the water meter. It'll turn it off. I mean this is for this is eight magnets that are about 1500 goss and it's enough to Do something pretty magical to your water, but it also turns off the the water meter. So how much time do I got? I won't use all this time There's just a lot of information about what is being provided for people and The health and safety effects. I mean obviously this is a whole book about litigation about the smart meters that was Published in 2010 2011. You don't think there's more information now, you know, you wonder why there's not more members of the public that are Healthier than others enough to still participate and Disagree with everybody in the room as politely as possible and provide information as such So I suppose that's just my public comments. I Want to stay on subject. I'll stop for now. Thank you. Thank you, sir Anyone else with us wish to comment on the consent agenda miss bush? Do we have anyone online? We do not we do not A motion on the consent agenda would be in order Vice mayor moves the consent agenda seconded Miss Watkins makes a second under debate or discussion Seeing none the clerk will call the roll Council member Newsom Aye Brown Aye Watkins Aye Bruner Aye Calentary Johnson Aye Vice mayor Golder Aye And mayor Keely Aye Motion passes and so ordered. We are on item number 15 This is the second reading and final adoption of ordinance 23-05 amending the code Regarding a b8 excuse me 481 military equipment use Let me see if we have any presentation on this Is there public comment on this item? Seeing and hearing none Are there council members? We're now on a on the regular agenda. Yes, sir on item 15 That was somewhat expecting a presentation beforehand But I can make public comments on item 15. Yes, you can Okay, I spoke on was a different number two weeks ago And the current police chief spoke on it has to do with this little throw robot, which I think is very useful And could definitely help personnel to find out information about what's going on and for people's safety Today that was less than three pages two weeks ago It was 44 and so I went into some detail about how One aspect of it on page six of that at the bottom about military weapons and the microwave weapons how they affect people And I chose to talk about how law enforcement is actually really being affected He almost as much as teachers and children Now without law enforcement. We don't we don't have laws And without healthy children and teachers. What kind of a future do we have? Um So, I mean I had a book about smart meters. I mean what it's There's just so many elephants in the room that aren't really being talked about that we're all being affected by whether we want to Acknowledge them or not. I mean it wasn't until the afternoon that someone said look at the chemtrails and I'm like I've been busy. I hadn't looked up but the sky is beautiful. But is that normal? No Uh But the weaponized street lights let's focus on that I had the opportunity to actually put my hands on one of those phased array antennas And it's pretty much exactly what professionals like mark steele have Described. I don't know if I should pick that thing up and bring it to the sheriff's department Seems like now that I've said that that's exactly what I should do with that. Um I'm just here because I know that everybody's doing the best they can and Uh There are things that just aren't really being discussed and to reduce something from 44 pages to a page and a half It's still just those elephants in the room aren't being discussed. Thank you Thank you, sir Anyone else wish to uh provide us with comments or testimony on this item? Miss bush anyone online Okay, thank you Any council members have questions or comments miss breeder? Um, I'll Make a motion to um Move item 15 the second reading and final adoption of ordinance number 2023-25 Amending the santa cruz municipal code chapter 9.90 ab 481 military equipment use Um, and I just wanted to add a little Please go ahead. Okay. Well, if we get yes, okay before we get a second and then we can have discussion um based on Comments we received with the first reading last meeting And some input from community members. There was a little confusion that has been clear. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Let's let's do this I'll second Thank you. Is that okay? What I want If you want to add Then let's add your language and then you can explain why you're adding your language So there is a motion to approve the ordinance as submitted. There is a second. Would you like to add language? just a direction for future agenda language to highlight The item that is being added or deleted from the military equipment list I think that would help clarify confusion Okay, agreeable a second. Absolutely agreeable now on your motion That is my motion to um Accept the staff recommendation here to adopt ordinance number 2023 and that future language on this item because this is a new legislation and um We're navigating through this. I think it would be really helpful to um See any item specific item added or deleted from the list to be highlighted in the description Um, so it really stands out and it's clear what what's being done So there's to avoid confusion and navigating through. I don't know. He said 44 pages. However many I just think it would be helpful going forward. Thank you Thank you councilmember further debate or discussion miss brown Just a quick point and I apologize for jumping the gun But I had a sense of where that was going and I absolutely agree I raised it at the last meeting and we did get a lot of communications about it So I hope that that direction can be helpful as these Come before us in the future Thank you for the debate or discussion Anyone with us wish to comment on this item? Miss bush no one online. No one. Thank you very much Clerk will call the roll Councilmember newson. Aye Brown. Aye Watkins. Aye Brunner. Aye Calentary johnson. Aye Nice mayor golder. Aye and mayor keely. Aye motion passes and so ordered We're on item number 16 This is an ordinance amending title 24 of the municipal code relating to various sections on parking We have Staff present on this. Good afternoon Good afternoon Council and mayor keely. Um, my name's sarah noisy. I work in the planning department and the advanced planning Policy planning division with me today is joanna edmunds a transportation planner in our public works department and as soon as I can get Organized here. We're gonna have a Screen is ready to share. Okay. Good afternoon. My name is Joanna edmunds second public works department and today we're talking about updates to bike parking and auto parking code So initially this began As an update for bike parking because of ab 20 97 Which went into effect in january Existing code has bike parking for commercial developments calculated as a percentage of auto parking And that's significant because ab 20 97 now exempts most new development within half a mile of a major transit stop From parking auto parking requirements. So therefore With our existing code without any changes We would not be able to require bike parking for commercial developments that fall into that zone Which obviously we still want to have bike parking, especially if there's not auto parking required Um, so this also made us look at the rest of the city code to see what else needed to be updated to comply with ab 20 97 So here we have this is the map of major transit stops So you can see it's quite a large portion of the city So um of significance is the purple line is the coastal zone So some of it falls within that area and then the gold areas are existing transit service and The red which overlaps a little bit on in the downtown Is planned The gold part the existing Comes from current service that we have through metro So that's something that we monitor and then the red is from some long range planning documents And we recognize Transit service doesn't always stay the same. So this map will need to be adjusted We would expect that existing wouldn't change more often than quarterly because that's when metro updates their service schedules And then the long range plans are generally on a five-year cycle So that's how frequently that would change and those are all potential It's also So it's important to note the law applies to both of these zones and that Many of these places where they become major transit stops is because they have overlapping service and so there's multiple routes in that area and then They have so it doesn't matter if it's one route or three routes What if there's a bus stopping there every 15 minutes? Then that's part of this zone that would be affected or that is affected now by 20 97 Next slide we go into some of the details about the bike parking proposals. So we We looked at some things that we had in our ATP plan from 20 90s 2017 or Future updates of what we had already identified Oh, sorry, uh, that's an active transportation plan and Then we also got feedback from community members and we looked Um at a lot of other jurisdictions that have similar progressive bike policy to our community like San Luis Obispo San Francisco Davis and Portland in Seattle to really help us Um make some of these updates and You'll see in your packet that the residential bike parking part is Struck out, but that's just because we changed the formatting. We didn't actually change any of the metrics with residential bike parking So it's still The same and we've added some Clarification for things that were a bit confusing sometimes for people when they were coming forward with Planning applications So for the commercial bike parking, we're now using square footage. So we're not dependent on that auto parking As a metric for the calculation We've updated the categories. So that's the table that you would see in your packet To make it really clear what's required where we've strengthened our objective standards To current practice Made some clarifications for the parking district one So that's a downtown parking district and then based on a lot of community feedback that we've had over the recent years We've added some requirements for spaces for cargo bikes in developments that have larger Quantity of bike parking And then also for fixic station, which is in case you're wondering what that thing is on the screen That's a bike fix it station that has tools and a pump so you can fix your bike up if necessary And then we've added a little bit of clarification for how to substitute bike parking for required car parking Okay, and then as Joanna mentioned in the background sort of looking at updating our bike parking standards Sort of alerted us to the reality that we had to make some changes to the way that we now regulate Parking for cars in these areas of our city that are shown on that map So the state law basically removes most parking requirements. So parking minimums For most development within a half mile of a major transit stop, which Joanna is defined So lodging uses would still be required to provide parking hotels motels, but in breakfast things like that The state law does include some exceptions to the law and our Current proposed ordinance does propose to exceed the law in sort of in four ways The first one being there are some exceptions that are written into The state law that would allow a jurisdiction to apply a minimum parking standard under certain limited circumstances In Santa Cruz, they would be extremely limited because none of our residential Development would qualify for the exception. So there's like the state law like general standard You shall not provide require major Sorry, you shall not require minimum parking within half mile And then there's some exceptions to that rule and then there's some exceptions to those exceptions And so within that basically all residential development in Santa Cruz would be excluded We would not ever be able to require A minimum parking standard in these locations Secondly, there is a small caveat about we're allowed to require parking for Employees at event centers, but then event centers is not well defined The only place that we could think of that in Santa Cruz that might qualify Might be the warriors arena and we're going through a whole planning process around that So if we feel the need to set some parking regulations around that use I think the downtown The expansion of the downtown plan is sort of the more appropriate way to do that rather than writing it into the zoning code Thirdly, the state law does allow jurisdictions to continue to require Parking for people with disabilities and parking for electric electric vehicles As would have otherwise been Required had the state law not superseded and we are recommending that we not do that that we go ahead and just eliminate all parking if there's no parking Required for anyone that just means that there's no parking required So do keep in mind that just because no parking is required doesn't mean that no parking will be built right what we see Very often places where they've studied this is that parking is often still built. They build less parking Um, and then whenever any parking is built That built parking will have to comply with the california Disabilities act and with the ev parking requirements. So Where parking is provided those off-street parking spaces will also be provided ADA the fourth place that our recommended ordinance kind of exceeds The state law is simply in the way that we're defining what's within half a mile of a major transit stop So the state law says like three quarters of the site has to be within half a mile And we're just saying any part of the site is within So it just kind of makes our mapping a little bit easier And makes implementation a little more clear. So I do just also want to mention that the climate action plan Which was approved by the previous council in september of last year actually has Action items that would eventually call for the elimination of off-street parking minimums and even move towards establishing maximums of off-street parking So the state law is sort of consistent with some of those goals that we already have locally of moving more towards active modes of transportation or shared modes of transportation reducing our dependence on specifically single occupancy vehicles And parking is one of the ways that we move in that direction There are a couple of other sort of smaller updates that are wrapped up with this because they're in the same code section So we're clarifying the allowance for parking lifts or parking stackers So previously we were kind of limiting the way that those could be used in the downtown so there was this extra process that Projects had to go through in order to get them approved So we've just written some standards into the code to allow those And now that would allow parking stackers to be used in all zones as long as they're within an enclosed space If they want to be anywhere outside of an enclosed space. They would have to go through more strict review with some performance standards And then obviously we're also adding the definitions of major transit stop and of a parking lift So we took this item to the planning commission on march 16th And had a pretty robust discussion with them. So the only item on the agenda and so it really took their time with it We really went through the details of the state law provisions. They asked a number of questions about you know How are we ensuring that we still are going to have access for people who have differences in mobility and need You know parking spaces that are designed for folks with disabilities So we talked through the provisions that we have for Providing blue curb. So on street parking for folks with disabilities And then also just to highlight having a Handicap plates or any a disabled hang tag allows Those automobiles to park at any meter in the city for free. So that's We felt that that's providing like good access for those folks who have those Mobility needs to still be able to participate in civic They also had some questions just about how we review bike parking and how we you know Look at these things and project applications that we clarified and then ultimately that hearing ended with unanimous approval of the to recommending approval to your so um Should your council choose to approve this item today for publication The next steps would be there would be a second reading on the next available agenda on the 25th And then that would give us 30 days should it be approved at that time It would become effective outside the coastal zone on May 25th So then we'll be submitting it to the coastal commission sometime later this year and then Our friends over in public works are going to have some more work to do on implementing those other parking Actions that are called for in the climate action plan And that work is going to you know kind of be taking place over the next several years And so With that our recommendation is here on the screen I do just want to note that the recommendation that's printed in your packet fails to mention that the Ordinance amendments are also part of the local coastal program implementation plan That was correctly noted in the noticing and in the agenda summary, but we missed putting it in the motion So I just want to note that um that we're asking for a motion to introduce for publication of ordinance that would Update bicycle parking requirements incorporate recent changes to state law relating to automobile parking standards update other existing standards relating to bike and vehicle parking and add new definitions while recognizing the environmental Determination that's identified in the agenda report, which is essentially that The bike parking and auto parking are are contained in the Um Analysis that was conducted in the EIR for the general plan and then furthermore that Um automobile parking is not an impact under CEQA So um with that We are now available for any questions Thank you so much. May I ask if there are questions miss count our johnson Yes, yes, all right. Thank you for the presentation and the report um a couple of questions So I know you mentioned that um the metros plan along the the the plan for where where bus stops are and how um Metro I put I put an acronym here and now I'm Remembering what I meant by the acronym Where the major transit stops how they're determined is determined by california code and determined by this process so Metro is going through a strategic planning process and um this may implicate changes to Where the made metro transit stops are the major transit stops are? Let's say that happens in five years or before five years. What is our process should this pass? What is our process in adjusting those buffer zones? So So um these maps will need to be maintained like so we have a couple of maps that are based on conditions that are like active on the ground and so maintaining those is sort of part of Some of the work that we do to you know, keep all of our gis um of the speed So that's that actually falls in claire and joanna's um arena to make sure at least annually that we're taking a look at these Areas of existing service and ensuring that our gis layer which our planners use when they're reviewing development applications Matches what's happening on the ground Okay, great. Thank you. Um So the timeline it should this pass today and it passes the second reading What my understanding is that it would be it could go in effect by the end of may but it has to go to coastal commission So are we in limbo and what happens if we have a development project that comes through? After it's passed here should have passed and before it gets approved by coastal Well, so since this is a state law, um, we're obligated to apply that state law whether or not our ordinance is in effect so Even within the coastal zone Yeah, I mean that would be my understanding. There's nothing in this particular law often when they Have legislation that would interact with the coastal zone in some manner they Call out specifically like nothing in this legislation shall supersede this coastal act and that's not mentioned in this legislation so We're reading that as this does kind of apply also in the coastal zone Got it. Okay. I think last question And we've emailed about this a little bit, but we I know this is state law and we're augmenting it in these four ways But there are concerns about the implications on neighborhood The neighborhood impacts when we aren't requiring parking So if you could speak to what we're doing mitigating actions that we're taking As a city and as a department to address neighborhood impacts. Sure. Yeah, so there are a couple of things So first of all, um, you know the bike parking standards are themselves a mitigation So ensuring that bike parking is available safe and secure is one of the key pieces to ensuring that people Actually feel encouraged and supported to use biking if that's an option for them Along those lines also is our bike share program. That's going to be coming soon this summer So that's you know, yet another component of creating mobility that doesn't rely exclusively on cars and hopefully moving some trips to those modes of transit The other thing is that as part of our objective design standards that we adopted at the end of last year There was a piece in there where we created a program that for residential development Requires bus passes to be provided to residents of projects that have 20 units or more and are within the same buffer area so for large residents larger residential development in these areas at least Metro is going to be a very real option. They're going to have a transit pass in hand and a bus stop within half a mile so um, so those are some pieces of it and then you know The city is also always working on other forms of mobility and supporting all the different ways that people need And you're going to hear more about that with our downtown parking strategy later today And I mean all of this is part of just a big comprehensive program that's really you know, how are we meeting all of these needs and um We are in this transition moment all of california in this kind of transition and we are being um guided by our state legislature in a much more urban direction than we have um thought of ourselves over the last 40 years and so these changes in um transportation demand and in parking demand are part of that transition and um, it's not all of it going to be easy And all of it is moving us closer to having um equitable housing options climate justice for The globe and then also just locally, you know helping us meet those climate goals and reducing dependence. So There are lots of things that we're doing and we're going to be continuing to do Great actually just one more. Um So there are commercial areas and businesses that aren't within the buffer zones and so this this is maybe more of a comment than a question, but um Those those areas that aren't within the buffer zone who are interested in in participating in this next wave of decreasing reliance on vehicles and moving to alternate modes of transportation and they're not now eligible for this minimum requirement exemption Like what are some steps we can think about and take in the future to address those areas that are outside the buffer zone This may be just for us to think about and maybe you don't have a response right now You do Good afternoon. Mary and council clerk locally transportation planner for the city Um, I actually think this is an area that you can show great leadership Council member callantara johnson in your role in the metro board Um in the work underway right now through the comprehensive operational analysis Metro will be bringing forward um a proposal Or a series of proposals on how to expand what this footprint looks like and how to expand the high quality transit network Again, it's going to be a series of growing pains And it's going to be a change from what we know right now But it does offer probably our greatest opportunity to expand what this footprint looks like and to expand our transit network So I look forward to working with you on that Good afternoon, mr. Butler thank you mayor kealy and um, I appreciate the opportunity to also speak to the councilmember callantara johnson's Comments and I would just add that It's within the council's purview to provide direction to staff to expand the area We don't have to adhere to the buffer zones that are established by ab 2097 And in fact our climate action plan calls for us to over the coming years as sarah mentioned Eliminate parking minimums and establish parking maximums So it is within council's purview to provide direction We cannot make that expansion here today because we haven't noticed that and it hasn't been commented on by the planning commission But that is direction that you could provide and something that we could uh pursue Um as we proceed councilmember brown, did you have I believe you were up next? Yeah, I uh, thank you for the presentation and all of the work on this. I um, I'm thrilled to see the bicycle work on the bicycle uh parking and the possibilities for That really being a resource for folks in these new uh projects And I thank you for reminding me that that we do have a requirement about bus passes because I was going to bring that up I didn't see it here and it is uh covered Um, but I did want to ask about the just going back around to the staff decision to not uh include the potential exceptions that the state is um has included in there in 2097 and because I am hard-pressed to find a good reason to uh get voluntarily give away local authority in the particularly in the context of what's happening right now with uh state law and um unfunded mandates and the like so Um, I guess I I'm wondering if you could talk about this a little bit more and you know, I'm looking at the example you gave about Uh, you know and and the the idea that we would most likely be the most projects would meet the Exceptions anyway, and so we don't we wouldn't really have a case to apply them to And so and I'm not I guess I'm I'm still not totally convinced of that and there may be good reasons why in some cases This is something that we do want to hold on to and one and then two in particular with the Exception around projects that have 20 percent Low or very low or extremely low income units We are making an assumption here that that's the case for these projects But as we know that is not the case because of density bonuses Which are most likely going to be the case with a lot of these projects or if not all of them So we won't have 20 percent in those projects We will have if we're lucky 15 13 to 15 based on Back of the envelope sample calculations. So, um, I I guess I'd just like for to hear you speak to that both of those. Thanks sure, so Okay, so we're talking about let me just make sure I got it all so we're talking about like why would we give up any local control? And then we're also talking about Does this exception apply? So, um, I'm going to answer the second one first. That's okay. So state law has consistently been interpreted by ports to read Text like this as applying to the base project. So, um, for those who may not be aware members of the public may be listening every density bonus project that is Applied for in the city of Santa Cruz has to include a set of base Plans so those are plans that meet all of our zoning and general plan and area plan Requirements and include no density bonus. They have to show that that's a fully conforming project And then we determine how many units are they have are able to fit on the site and then they can apply for density bonus based on that number of units and you know, we ensure that the Projects are comparable. The units are a similar size so, um Because our inclusionary standard is currently at 20 percent low income required in any base project lots of most Projects are now using the density bonus because that at that 20 percent level they are entitled to make that request so, um You're correct that once you add that 20 percent bonus or either a 35 percent or 50 percent bonus then The net affordable units drops Um and when there have been other Qualifiers such as this one elsewhere in state law the courts have consistently interpreted that 20 percent as being 20 percent of the base So basically state law has consistently been interpreted by the courts as You know density bonus units are bonus and they aren't counted in any of these other places so, um, I understand that that's you know kind of disappointing and a little bit not You know, maybe doesn't meet what we'd like it to say and that's You know, that's kind of the reality of how it's been interpreted So we're looking at this and saying, you know between the two caveats that say either it's a minimum of 20 percent That are low or very low income or it contains less than 20 housing units. That's that's all our residential development So at least for residential It's it's pretty much everything um So now to the this question of like, you know, couldn't we still continue to require something um for ev parking and for parking for the disabled So we could the state law does allow for that and this is the consideration that we're making so there are a couple of things so first of all, um Is simply site planning, right? So if If there is a development that could be developed with zero parking and again We really would only expect these to happen like very close to downtown. That's something um adding even ADA spaces or ev spaces changes the way that you have to plan for the site so now you need a frontage and that frontage can't just be sidewalk and Retail space there has to be a driveway and a garage that are directly accessible from the street And then you have to you would need to have like signage there So it clearly so people aren't trying to enter and trying to park there to only to find that they're not driving An ev and they're not disabled and then they can't park there and so then they have to turn around and come out so in thinking about that and then in thinking about the ways that um other options there are for automobile for ev car charging in all of our public lots and in you know anywhere that Parking is built and you know lots of parking will be built They will still be needing to meet our standards for ev parking And for parking for the disabled and then also thinking about the ways that we can provide space On the street to meet those needs for folks with you know mobility needs genuine mobility needs We feel that we are addressing those needs to a great degree And it's not really the benefit that we would get from like requiring this limited number of parking spaces and then you know the whole change to the to the Site plan that would have to come with that including a driveway and backup space um There wasn't really a lot of benefit that we were getting anymore And so this is our recommendation is that we just forego parking entirely any parking that is built will have to provide You know 12 percent ev spaces and you know one for 50 for 88 and that kind of scales depending on how many parking spaces there are So so that's you know, that's why this is our recommendation I just a follow-up question and then one other that I remembered So thank you for that Again, I'm still just because it's if we include the possibility of that exception It doesn't mean that we have to we're going to be requiring that of a project it would just I'm trying to understand here. Um, this is a Give us the option. It would give us the that's my understanding And there I'm just thinking about You know some of the possibilities here and and I think about a a site like For example the corner of laurel and pacific where there really is almost no on-street parking in 205 units are going to be built I recognize that's if there's a different set of parameters there because of when that project was permitted and Is being built, but I'm just thinking about sites like that where it really could be The city may have an interest in in supporting or or you know pushing a developer to Include parking in those cases so Again, I'm just is there a doubt. I mean, there's a downside to Proceeding along that path, but I'm just wondering what the downside is to allowing that To be that option. Thank you In in the ordinance itself Yeah, so, I mean, I guess the only the I don't know that I would say that there's a a downside to keeping an option And I think there are some complications. We would want to think through so We would want to make sure that we had standards that were objective, right because we know that that's important these days and then we would want to Make sure that they were kind of equally applied, right so We would need to be able to define a site Like you're describing in an objective manner So for example when there's no street parking around the site Yeah, or very little Yeah, so, yeah, I mean I think Mr. Butler Thank you, and thanks. I think sir. You did a great job of explaining sort of the rationale that led us to where we're at I think I would add in part to address the the question about the downside that you asked about councilmember brown the The state law ab 297 specifies that Within 30 days the public agency within 30 days of the receipt of a completed application The public agency has to make written findings Supported by a preponderance of the evidence on the record that Not imposing or enforcing parking minimums Would have a substantially negative impact And It it speaks about the the different things that it would have a substantially negative impact on like Meeting our regional housing needs In in that instance for example The provision of parking is actually going to Frustrate the purposes of meeting our regional housing needs because as sarah mentioned from a site planning perspective If you're providing parking there, you're not providing housing And it goes on with with various other Ways That you know, we could potentially make those findings. I think what it boils down to is that with the Exemptions it's creating It's creating a process by which the city would have the burden of proof Of establishing that there is a parking challenge. And I think the The primary Crux of the issue is that when there is a parking challenge developers will choose to provide parking Because they're not going to be able to market their units if they Don't have a client base a tenant Who isn't going to provide that? Who isn't going to require that parking space? so Ultimately The market will respond Whether that is on an individual project basis or over the long term as parking Demand and supply changes Projects may build in additional parking or offer parking for people to To use If they're not residents or they're not visiting the businesses, you know, they're they're building extra parking to lease So there will be a market response to this over the long term and this opens up the flexibility to have parking If the developer sees that there's a need for it or for them to say no in this particular instance based on the Tenants that we're targeting Based on the location and the proximity to transit or services. We don't want to provide that and so Having those exceptions I think one Creates some uncertainty And two it places additional demands on the city to provide that burden of proof When it could be something that the market addresses Thank you. I'll reserve my comments on that for later, but I also have one last question if I could That's related to In addition to the the wonderful Work that you've done and looking at models around parking in in new development I'm wondering if any of those models or if you consider included or if you considered inclusion of or requiring EV charging for bicycles we have that in the case of park car parking we have a bicycle requirements and It would be great for people in those high-density projects to be able to charge their bicycles if that's where they're parking them Yeah, happy happy to take that one. So most Electric bikes that are on the market right now have a removable battery And most people just remove it and bring it into their unit or into their office space. They're charged with a regular Standard plug and so it's actually much easier to do that than to Wire a bike room or another facility for a ton of outlets Yes, good question though councilmember golder I'm sorry. I'm so confused because I was under the impression. We were cleaning up um our local code to comply with state law and I didn't realize until this Um presentation that we were actually going beyond that and so some of what council member brown was saying really ring true for me and I just was really kind of Apprehensive about going beyond what the state Is requiring at this time in terms of giving up our local control and I just think of if I am a developer and I buy a house on the upper west side and tear it down and build a 10 bedroom house And then decide to have no parking and move in 20 students. How was that going to impact the family? That lives on either side and Is that something am I like like way out of left field here? Is that something that literally could happen if we pass this today? So that's something that could happen today um This the law the state law specifically says that we can't Require parking for any development. That's less than 20 units. So if you're talking about a single family home From a three bedroom home to a 10 bedroom home. It's still one home. Mm-hmm and um This the state law exemption would prevent us from requiring parking there. Okay, and so then In 2030 when we all move to electric vehicles, where does the state propose we charge them at night? I mean So there's a there are a couple of challenges with everyone moving to electric vehicles You know the grid is a whole different issue that we're not going to solve here today, right? Um, so I mean yes, this is I mean this is a concern. I think so what we're seeing in development applications is that a lot of The spaces that are coming in they're required by our code to build out a certain number of them it's like 12 percent for residential development with a minimum of one space and um What we're seeing is that they're wiring so that they're like charger ready Is like more than half of the spaces. That's like the one of the most recent Applications we got in was doing that. So developers are starting to think ahead about that and you know again We are in a transition period. We're transitioning in lots of different ways And I think that's um, you know another way that like as multifamily housing gets built. I think As more people have electric vehicles They may need to move away from having a signed parking because different people are going to need to have access To the chargers at different three in the morning get out move your car Or you know, you have access Tuesday Thursday Saturday Someone else uses that space the other days of the week. So Yeah, I mean, I think public chargers are going to proliferate, right? I think we're probably going to see more requests for placing charging stations in our public lots Um, and we may even start to see them on curbside, you know on some of our metered street parking as well um, and so In terms of people having It just makes me so nervous. I think somebody building a house with and I know I and I I understand That we're complying I just feel really uncomfortable with going beyond and giving up any of our Limited local control that we still have over land use and I feel really really strongly about that and I I don't know how to make that more of a question other than well No, I think I hear what you're saying I I understand you're concerned about like the state gives us potentially this out Like why are we choosing not to use it? Right? Right? Yeah. No, I hear you So it's a matter of how would we be able to use it? Would we be able to use it or would we write this into the code with a certain set of expectations and never be able to use it? So this is kind of what we wrestled with as we were drafting the code And the planning director mentioned, you know, we have 30 days Like if we if we take one of these exemptions and write it into the code We have 30 days to produce evidence that Not requiring parking in this location would have one of three detrimental effects It would negatively impact our ability to meet our arena It would negatively impact residential or commercial parking in the area or it would third, what's the third one? um It would negatively impact our ability to meet our any special housing needs for the elderly or persons with disabilities so The idea that any requiring parking would negatively impact our ability to provide any kind of housing is sort of Czar to me. I don't even understand what that could mean um So that leaves us with the other one is that not requiring parking in this location would have a negative impact on existing parking supplies Okay, so What does that mean? What's a negative impact on an existing parking supply? Parking isn't an impact under siqua. We can't evaluate it under siqua So that's an extremely subjective measure to even put in the state law Second, we have 30 days to make that finding. So what kind of study are we going to produce? in really two weeks of working time if you've got to like realize you need to do it And then publish it in some manner like how how would we be able to even use that? It's sort of mind-boggling honestly so in thinking all of that through and we're like what What are the chances we're going to be able to get something that would survive? You know a legal challenge. What are the chances we're going to be able to get something that would We would actually be able to use and then where would we want to even use it? How would we get ready for it? It just kind of became this enormous knot that um We weren't certain was leading us to a lot of benefit I would reiterate one of the things that sarah has mentioned which is um and the question she asked which is Where could we use it? We cannot use it We certainly can't use it for projects under 20 residential units We don't believe that we can use it on any residential projects based on our 20 inclusionary requirement so that would leave us as establishing This exception process to apply only to some commercial developments and as as we noted before We have the climate action plan that is moving us to Reduce or eliminate parking minimums and establish parking maximum So this is really one step along the way on that spectrum It is slightly going beyond state law But really in in that respect with respect to the exceptions We're talking about commercial components and i'll say you know from from the perspective of existing businesses and existing commercial conversions particularly as retail has declined and restaurants have have increased in popularity the ability to put in restaurants is Limited by parking they have a higher parking ratio than a retail Space would and so this is also opening up the opportunities for those existing vacant storefronts to convert to restaurant uses and You know, it's it's one of the things that that we do and will continue to wrestle with as a community of neighbors Having concerns about the parking availability. There are options to address that for example putting in permit parking requirements for neighborhood streets That's that's one of the ways that those potential neighborhood concerns that That can be addressed should those parking issues materialize I appreciate how always persuasive you are mr. Butler. Um, but I I still am just wrestling with this And I um, I give some other comments, but I can wait councilmember Watkins Yes, thank you. Thank you to my colleagues for bringing up the 88 the 88 issue I too is trying to understand that and I was rereading that report and putting on my urban planning had to try to best follow you guys um, but I I I think I understand your logic and I also understand the concern particularly with the 88 population specifically um, my question, I guess following up on the questions that have already been asked is What if in your knowledge have other jurisdictions done to address this? Do they have any has any other jurisdiction not gone this far? And if so Um, why was it for similar reasons or if not then What how did they untangle the knot as you describe it? Um, yeah, so This is as this is um, you know, relatively new state law just took effect this year And so I um, I haven't found other examples of other jurisdictions that have adopted ordinances Along these lines. They they may be doing that. I haven't been able to find them There are a number of examples of cities that have eliminated parking minimums and um, we have you know, they kind of There might be a bit of a range of the way that they do it They some places do it only within certain neighborhoods some places have done it citywide Other places have done it for residential citywide, but then commercial in a more limited way And you know, we do have some Results of that you know the first city in the nation to do that was Buffalo, New York and There was a study done on like sort of what was the performance. What was the result of making that change? And um, they found that parking was still being built It was they were building about half as much as had previously been required Um, but so as soon as you're building one parking space that first parking space is an ADA space And then in Santa Cruz that second space is an EV space so, you know Any parking that is built is going to provide those And I think and a lot of the places where they have pursued a zero parking Just because I just on that point. So even if the parking is built, but it's not necessarily Near the location to the proximity that it needs to be for somebody with ADA needs It would have to meet all those ADA standards. Okay. Okay, please. Okay. It's it's a complete loss. Okay. Yeah um, so the The evidence that we have from places that have gone ahead and like gone to zero parking Is that um, they are seeing this as sort of a stimulus, but particularly for commercial uses that um that parking standard has really been challenging for commercial uses to go in a lot of residential Uses are kind of continuing to just build parking. I mean we saw that um at a 3-1 water They weren't required to build any parking and they're building like one space per unit So, um, I I would expect Santa Cruz to see similar results And you know their their results have been positive ultimately Mr. Butler, thank you, mayor keely I'd highlight the point that sarah made a little bit more about The implications for commercial one of the things that we wrestle with oftentimes in our current planning is encouraging commercial Which is really critical for the health of our community Both for employment opportunities and for options to walk and bike to Goods and services that are needed and with this Um, but with the objective standards, for example, we saw quantitative Evidence that our parking standards are hindering the ability to provide commercial and residential and so these mixed use projects Will be facilitated by providing lower parking ratios again not That they won't provide any parking But they'll pick the right size Parking and they'll look at how they can manage that parking between the commercial and residential components So I appreciate sarah raising that commercial part because that is really a key component particularly given the high ratios of The parking requirements that we currently have for commercial that were also identified as part of our objective standards process when we did our test fit analysis Sure. No, I appreciate you bringing that up. Just a last question is more nuanced in that You mentioned that the only kind of commercial recreation space you would think of is the The warrior's arena, but I was wondering what where the civic falls into your definition Yeah, so an event center. I mean potentially. Yeah, potentially the civic we could call an event center It's not defined in the in the law at all. So Um, I would think of that as yeah, so you're right Yes, the civic is potentially an event center. Um, and they already have their own parking, right? So in terms of like a new use that hasn't been built where we would be requiring parking, right? This is, you know, kind of the only thing sort of on the horizon Oh, I see. I apologize. I missed it. Okay. Got you. No, I understand to be built and therefore being requiring parking I see. Thank you for clarifying Thank you. I I think I've gotten through all members who have asked question Thank you very much. If I might take a moment on this I'm intrigued by your last statement the civics parking is where The civic What I thought you meant I was unfamiliar with parking for the civic Let me see if I understand what the state's trying to do here So the state believes that By reducing or eliminating the ability of local governments to mandate parking That's then connected in a policy way To the desire to reduce Vehicle miles traveler or whatever it might be By internal combustion engines. Is that right? It's a it's a it's an emission reduction strategy. Is that right? Okay If where we're going with this so if from policy perspective where we're going with this Is that we are going to go to zero emission vehicles What is the objection to parking with zero emission vehicles? So it sounds like you're asking two questions. So you're First trying to understand You know, what are so what are the differences between parking a zero emission vehicle versus parking? An internal combustion engine vehicle meeting climate goals And then it sounds like there's also kind of a second question in there about like Is that really the goal is to reduce greenhouse gases? So I think there's probably These are there are overlapping goals here And again, this is conjecture because this is a state legislation and I wasn't there when they were So and this is my guess on that There's a relationship between transportation and land use as our State legislators are pushing us to change land use They also need us to change transportation to make all of these things work together because it's one unified system When we have options for transportation, then we can have more people in a smaller area And they can all get to their needs and meet all of their daily needs When all of those people need to park cars We can't get them in a small of a space because those cars take up so much space We need parking at the origin. We need parking at the destination and we need parking at all of those other places Where people need so that uses up a lot of urban land. So the state has several goals here They are trying to meet emissions targets and reducing single occupancy vehicles Reduces emissions of all types because even zero emissions vehicles still rely on power Which is still generated not entirely through solar panels, right? So Every every vehicle has some amount of carbon footprint secondly As we're trying to build more and more housing and put it into places where are already highly resourced They have good jobs. They have good schools We need to make room for all of these new housing units to fit in those locations And so one of the ways that we can do that is by encouraging other modes of transportation That will allow families to go down from two cars to one car From one car to zero cars that will allow, you know, new professionals starting out in the world to delay getting their first car All of these things add up because even zero emission vehicles can cause gridlock And can cause the pickup trucks for landscaping to sit in gridlock So as we reduce parking for all vehicles, we are going to be reducing greenhouse gas emissions Whether or not that's tied to the emissions of the vehicle when we are building When assuming that the downtown expansion plan moves Forward successfully and there's something between 1600 and 1800 new units In the downtown expansion area If we assumed one vehicle per unit Which is probably an underestimate but if we do Are we saying that 16 to 1800 units with 3 to 4,000 people occupying those units downtown The private sector is not going we cannot require the part of the private sector to build a parking space State law says that already that's true now today as of january 1 Um, I also would kind of argue with the assumption that it's one vehicle per unit I don't think that's accurate anymore. I think, you know, there's actually census data on this now and um and metro so I attended a very fascinating metro meeting by metro transit and one of the things one of the maps that they made was A map of concentration of households with zero cars But this is a data point that you can pull from the us census at this point and um those households are Concentrated in a few neighborhoods and two of them are in our downtown and in our beach flats area So I think there actually are a lot of Households that are currently operating on zero vehicles and I think that number is likely to grow particularly in the downtown So, um, it may not be very high. It might be, you know, I don't know A reasonable estimate to me seems around like 15 to 20 percent of all households in the city might be a zero car Household, but I think that number is likely to grow and I think as we build housing that doesn't require a car and Makes it inconvenient to own one. We will see that number grow. I mean, I think honestly if we're talking about reducing VMT, which as I've mentioned is related to climate change and reducing travel time for everyone um The way that that happens is by making it less convenient to park. That's just the truth of it either It's expensive or inconvenient when parking is free and easy Everyone will drive and we just simply are not in that State anymore in terms of land use in california. It's just not going to work. Thank you I appreciate that asked a bike parking. Can we require under this law? under the new state statute We can or cannot require a bike parking. We can yeah, okay. Thank you My reading of the draft ordinance I'd like you to take a look at page 16.2 in our agenda package and 16.3 if you could Thank you. I'm looking at the portion that begins with 658 63.2 When I looked at the ordinance itself I don't believe we have this state language in it. Is that correct? Yes It would occur to me that it might be useful given this is where you where we can deal with possible exemptions Correct, that's what these sections are The the possible exemption section, correct? I think it might be useful to Not by reference but by actually placing it in the ordinance at the appropriate place I think that would be a helpful thing So that folks don't have to go back And look at the statute because the statute is not written into our ordinance if I if I've got it, right? Is that correct? I'm not sure I understand what you're asking. You're asking that we incorporate these exceptions That well, let me ask a different way. Where are these exceptions? Incorporated in the draft ordinance. They are not we are recommending that we do not do that and why is that? so um We are for several reasons. So first of all, um, as we've mentioned, we don't believe that these exceptions Would apply to very much at all. So based on the city's inclusionary requirement and our understanding of the way that State density bonus law has been interpreted by the courts They would not apply. We would not be able to use any of these exceptions on any residential development any residential component of residential of development So then we're looking at commercial development only and um as we've discussed Already, we've we've been thinking about like how would we run a program that would do this? How would we make these findings? So how would we find that there was a negative impact to existing commercial or residential parking? What is a negative impact to residential commercial parking because it's not an impact under sequel? So we'd be looking at some other metric. How are we going to define that metric? And then how are we going to make that finding in 30 days? So that's what the state law would require I heard and I appreciate that I heard that When you made that point earlier and I thought it was a very good point Um, I'm not persuaded though that the point is good enough not to include this Because it is the one place whether it's broadly applied narrowly applied. It's six parcels. It's 5 000 parcels It's the one place there's a there the state law gives us a pressure release valve If we make the appropriate findings whether the state law has given you enough time to make findings or not Is not my issue my issue is that this is the pressure release valve That we may choose to use from time to time It's permitted under the state law and I think it's my view anyway that we should include that As the language in the state law Put that not by reference but put that language in into our ordinance. That would be my preference I understand the argument you made. I think it's a good argument. I think it does further point out how Poorly drafted this is not all bills are drafted very well and this I think is a bill that's not drafted very well Uh, you know, I had my chance to draft bills and of course they were all perfect The rain of terror at the time, but I do think that there's some benefiting in doing that Also, if we could Can you direct me to where we could put language in relative to bicycle parking? Where would we integrate that into the ordinance to accomplish what with relative to bicycle parking to make it very clear that if What we're doing here is we're In order to comply with state law. We can't require Vehicle parking It seems to me we are not prohibited from requiring bike parking. Am I right? Right. We do require bike parking and we are continuing to require bike parking understand and in in But with regard to this do you believe that our existing code Makes it unnecessary not to reference that That we we retain that authority. I that yes I think I think we're covered. Okay. And where where is that in the code? All right, sir. If I may jump in on that so Again, claire globally transportation planner The whole reason this item started was for that exact item that we saw the flag that in not being able to provide parking We also wouldn't be able to provide bike parking. So the the basis of all of the ordinance that's in front of you So I can hopefully find the correct section. Uh, we added specific language that says um Even where no auto parking is required these bike parking requirements still apply And so that is for all land uses in all zones That's specifically why we changed the calculation of required bike parking from Percentage of required auto parking to Square footage basis. So we're we're clean on that in the in the table on bike parking that covers that. Yes So if you look at page 1611 of the clean ordinance. Yeah, I got it Got it. Can I ask a follow-up? We're here still asking I am but please go just a follow-up question on that because I I I did notice this and I I just wanted to um, ask though because there are some There's some language in here about the potential to My recollection as I can't find it exactly where it is. Um to for the um, either the zoning administrator or planning director to Wave this And so that means that it's not really a requirement I love this question. Thank you. It would be great to just hear about yeah Yes, so the last time that we updated our bike parking standards The planning commission elected to make a recommendation that our residential bike parking requirements also added in One class two bike parking space per four units Class two is a bike rack rather than class one, which is an enclosed secure space That is a very large proportion of bike parking Off in some of the larger projects that we've seen recently It is resulting in a quantity of bike parking that just doesn't pass a straight face test and isn't able to be Cited on site outside of the public right away In a way that makes any logical sense even to me A bike person and so in those instances we work with the project sponsor to right size the parking Sometimes that's that we require additional class one parking so enclosed secure parking for residents sometimes it's that we Work with them to reduce or recite the amount of parking that is provided a bike parking that is provided but it's It's used very sparingly and only in projects where I could tell you it It just does not make sense the code requirements that we have if we if the council wish to include 658 63.2 In the ordinance, where would we put that where would be your advice for putting that Want to incorporate the language of the state law. Yes So my recommendation would be that we do that under 24 12 220 24 12 220. Yeah, thank you point seven So so and I actually Can I consult with my colleague for a moment? Pardon me may I consult with my colleague for a moment before I finish answering that question? I got a portion of that if you don't mind I'd like to ask the city attorney to weigh in If we had the exact language it could be done. So today. Otherwise, we would need to come back for A second first reading if that's where it lands Procedurally, I'm so be it sir That was essentially I was going to mention that We can so we would have if we chose to it would be in 24 12 24 point 12 point 220. Is that correct? So that that's that would be my recommendation That's what would make sense to me. Um, and I what I was just asking Lee about is um Uh, it might be easier for your council to give us direction to go back and draft that language Rather than trying to read it into the record now. That's that's exactly where it's going to go You got it. It's exactly there. I'm just looking to where it would be placed when we give you that direction That'd be fine. Thank you My last comment I will make when there's a motion Is there a motion does anyone with it with us wish to provide comment Wow, I actually feel supported by more than seven More than six of the seven council members here Check three pages of notes on this item. It's really just baffling Um, it's hard not to be really rude About what's going through here. Well, don't be Damn You know why thank you Appreciate your comment and I appreciate you greatly and I appreciate many of the things I've heard from Staff today. Thank you, but The dialogue I so disagree with by the people who are pushing this It was causing me to like really think some Rather insulting thoughts. I took notes on that. So it seems like there's going to be More information is going to be asked about this. I know for Myself as a contractor The parking downtown has gotten significantly worse. I wasn't expecting to speak on this subject Um, so I didn't go through and read the particulars But there's some stuff that I'm unclear of it seems like these things go into effect When the residences are more than 20 But parking is already very difficult and by the explanations of let's say the civic center The downtown parking has become challenging You know upwards of like trying to find downtown parking in powelto for san francisco So I'm glad that there's going to be some possible revisions Um, although I could make some more particular comments. I appreciate your guidance. Mr. Thank you. Thank you, sir Bonnie, excuse me miss bush anyone with us online. There are. Yes. All right. How many do we have? Currently four. Okay. Let's take the first one Hey, hello council. Uh, this is ryan mechwell I just wanted to call in a support of this I think staff has done an incredible job here and it's really great to see us pushing just a teeny bit beyond what We just absolutely have to do They made some great points with regard to climate especially and with regards to housing I'll make a point as well But first the climate This is something that's laid out in our climate action plan To eliminate parking minimums and establish parking maximums This is just that very first step working towards that to help mitigate our impact as a city on the climate And I think it's a great one and an easy one to take With regard to housing anytime We are building a parking space or building a parking garage We're not housing people. We are housing cars And with housing cars comes a cost the estimated cost to build a parking space depending on where it is Be it on the surface level or an underground garage can range from tens of thousands of dollars in the low end To a hundred thousand dollars and that is a cost that's passed on to whoever's living in the housing above the parking Uh, like staff said there are a lot of people in the city that don't own cars I am one of them. I bike everywhere and I am perfectly okay It may be a little bit too passionate about bikes, but otherwise perfectly okay Uh, I am not a fan of having to pay for parking I have parking that I don't use my house that I live at has two parking spaces And we are required to have them That's money coming out of my pocket that I have no use for That I'd rather be spending on savings or you know going out and spending it on a local businesses But I'm forced to spend that money on parking instead Uh, we heard some concerns about Will we still have any parking? I think The project that's proposed at the food bin and herb room is a pretty good case study of the impacts this might have on the city Right now they are taking advantage of ab 2097 and Cutting down the amount of required parking to just I believe six or eight. It's an even number in any case They still have eb parking and they still have aba parking as is currently required under the city ordinance I did ask them though about this if this were to go into effect as staff recommended it Would they build zero parking and their answer was no they would keep the parking that they have And I think we're going to see this Except with very few exceptions maybe in downtown But we're still going to see some kind of parking people still drive cars and they're still going to drive cars for the foreseeable future and the businesses Sorry, the developers are still going to build parking for those people It may not be as much parking, but it'll be enough parking to meet the needs of the businesses that are building And just to close up Again with the impact on parking if we're building housing for people who don't have cars and encouraging people to not own cars That's not going to make traffic worse. It's not going to make parking worse It's going to make it better for those who do use cars and it'll make housing and life cheaper for those who don't So thank you staff. I hope you will move forward with what staff has recommended. Thank you Thank you very much miss bush Excellent Good afternoon Good afternoon mayor This is Eric Rodberg as a driver of an evi that is not a tesla I can tell you one of the big frustrations is that Folks who drive gas cars or even sometimes folks who drive electric cars will park in charging stalls and Not plug in it's just a convenient parking spot for them and The only really viable fast charger for non tesla cars in santa cruz is the sixth stall electrify america Station in front of trader joes and that is often the case here. I was there last night. There was a toy That's a pickup truck parking one of those stalls and there's a vehicle called. It's a section 225 11 that allows a Private owner to tow cars in electric charging stalls when they're not charging so But they don't do it because you know they don't want to Get their customers mad so if there's some way you could make that a condition of approval of projects and or just Somehow city staff talk to building owners and say look, this is really important. You need to enforce Just like you would a disability spot You can't have you can't be parked there and people respect that they know Very few people we don't have Disabled place will park in a disabled spot even on a private lot But that's not true with ev charging stalls and and I can tell you that is one of the big Problems with ev adoption is really a lack of chargers So if we're also going if you're going to go to this model in the state's requirement Requirement where we have fewer spaces and then you're going to have even fewer opportunities To charge at home. You're going to need these public charging spaces. So once again, that's vehicle code section 225 11 The subsection that's applicable is if posted in accordance With subdivision sudden such the owner person person in lawful possession of a privately owned or operated Parking facility after notifying the place your sheriff's department may cause removal of a vehicle from a stall et cetera et cetera et cetera if vehicle is not connected for electric charging purposes. So If there are other tools available, that would be great But I think that's a really important thing that we need to start enforcing and it will Be a small piece of the puzzle of this parking issue that you guys are discussing now. Thank you very much Thank you very much Miss bush our next one Good afternoon Good afternoon Good afternoon. Uh, this is uh, kandace brown from the transportation public works commission Um, I really appreciate the robust discussion in the city council that you're really taking this issue Seriously, because it is very impactful One thing it hasn't been addressed is the maps themselves which are key to this discussion The maps are actually produced by and bag And originally the maps showed quality transit from downtown to the university and suddenly in december The new maps that were fed into the g gps system The gis system changed it so that only the east side had quality transit Even though the metro hadn't changed anything and for future the west side and downtown Which makes absolutely no sense when you actually know the number of people going up to the university and of course the metro downtown so I sent a note to Transportation about that and have not received a response back about why that actually flipped and was actually a question where the maps themselves were Accurate those those are directly tied to um 20 97 I also want to mention that on the east side They are in particularly impacted because there is no parking garages And they are also at the same time being assigned for high density along sokel water ocean and part of mission And so It will impact commercial and it will impact the neighborhood community businesses along there Without any parking. I don't really know how they could survive Um, as far as making arguments, um, I would find many reasons to make arguments based on the demographics of our town based on um, 12 to 13 percent being over 65 And I'm sure a higher number being handicap That the need for parking and it would be naive to suggest that the developers should be left to decide about parking When in fact we have seen projects where we had to convince developers to change their policy in parking When we showed that the impacts would be significant in the surrounding neighborhood as was the case of 708 Water street They decided to do one parking space off street and that parking space is Full and that's very low income and disabled parking for caregivers And um, I really do feel that parking is an equity Issue and that lower income people should not be penalized at the same time car For occupants should not be penalized for using unit without associated parking I recommend you look at and introduce into the public record Rick Hyman's letter of april 11th at 12 30 p.m Sent to the city council on this issue. His recommendations are so spot-on. I couldn't agree with it more He actually talks about the full impacts The concern about people parking in sidewalks intersections driveways And that you should really assure that before you make any changes to anything outside the state law That you consider many different issues having to do with workers Not putting the load of parking on to the public Um, as frankly has been seen downtown with Pacific Station south and north One of the arguments made for the parking rush So I end my time, but thank you for the consideration and please do not include Uh, do not take out any of the exclusions with the law. Just keep with the law as it is right now and move forward That's what you have to do by state law. Thank you very much. Bye. Thank you so much Miss bush another person online. Thank you Good afternoon Good afternoon Yes, uh, yeah, this is carrot. Hey, uh, this is an incredibly sad day that the government is so held that to eliminate liberty in this country There's no more free and freedom than travel and you and the state want to take it away As you admit if there was free ample parking everywhere Everybody'd want it as you know What you should be all about is providing the people what they want need and are willing to pay for You and the state's false opinions about this are tyranny as usual powered by the climate change catch all justification for any and all removal of freedom Neighborhoods with no cars is just an indication of poverty not a desire to walk and bite Just like the two weeks to flatten the curb. That wasn't good enough Just like getting two covid shots wasn't good enough just getting eb cars now Even that's not good enough without freedom of travel. This becomes a jail. That seems the plan for the inmates. Thanks Thank you One more miss push one more. Okay. Thank you Good afternoon Good evening or good evening for me. This is pier B. Shea community is on. Sorry if I don't make a whole lot of sense It's 2 30 in the morning here in barcelona, spain Whereas you know in europe share A share biking and share scooters is huge Um, I wasn't sure but it seems to me when I was hearing from staff The map and I guess also may be addressed by the previous caller I wasn't sure if beach flat is in lower ocean is included not in the ordinance but obviously beach flat having such a hard parking issue or You know where there's too many cars and very narrow streets It would be very important to have Obviously beach flat being included I really like as well during staff presentation To use the pump station of kind of like awareness about the about the bikes with their tools Which can be used by many people and it would be ideal to see one of those Pumping tool stations in beach flat park and another one may be in poidspark or something like that Um, but then also I do remember when maybe I'm jumping too much in the wagon on that issue But uh, since we're talking about having bike sharing again be activated in the city Which I'm really you know, it's it's a it's a great Great way of transport and transporting. However, I remember free covet when jump bikes were around There were lots of bikes who were just abandoned pretty much everywhere here and there in the in the In the sidewalks and the sidewalks are already very narrow There's no wheelchair access so the few people on wheelchair was constantly being blocked and Asking people to move those bikes and in Europe for example in paris and in spain when you use your bike chair You have to put it in a station specifically If not, you get a 30 euro fine, which is like, you know 10 times what you you pay for it in france The scooters have been prohibited now in paris because of that issue People would borrow them or not use them and then just swap them and dump them anywhere And there were just so many that eventually they said only private scooters are allowed not to share ones So just like in thinking ahead It would be great that if we're gonna have a when we have bike share that they have make sure that they go back to Their stations and maybe could then in those stations as well in beach flat But also to have then like you know a return so people to avoid, you know, don't leave in the bikes abandoned to just have you know Having a certain fine and maybe use those fines then to you know For goods for the city And other than that that's about it. And thank you very much Thank you so much for calling in and staying up so late to give us your thoughts very much appreciate that that shows a Pretty serious level of commitment Anyone else miss bush anyone else who's with us wish may comment Matters back before the city council A motion would be in order miss brown So i'd like to move that We direct staff to return to the council at the earliest possible meeting with a revised ordinance That retains exceptions available to the city under ab 20 97 Section 658 636 point 2 b That's in the state law the portion of the state law Is there a second second second by Miss golder miss brown on your motion. Thank you. Um, I am Uh, I was hoping to just ask for a vision to the this but I uh through our discussion It's becoming clear that uh, this would require a new first reading I am uh as others have expressed and members of the public have expressed concerned about the, uh Abdication of all of our local authority and I think that there may be cases where It would be important to have a tool like this available to us And so um, and I recognize that they're very good arguments being made and I recognize that for you all It's a technical problem in operationalizing this But I do believe that having this available to us is is really important. Um Mr. Butler, uh, you said and and the there's general narrative that the the market will respond Um, and while that may be true Uh, my job here is to act in the public interest and not rely on the market to make all of these decisions for us So, um, I feel that it's important that we Um, retain that control and that's why I'm brought it up here today. Thank you Miss Brunner I just have a, um Clarifying question on this um topic Including the state language of ab 2097 in The proposed ordinance is Is what you're asking for the mo in the motion Can can I respond mayor to that directly? Okay. Yes. That's just the language. So including the Uh, exempt exceptions that are available to us. So not Directly as it's written in the state law per se, but um I'm not asking that it be included in there as an advisory of what the state law says. I'm asking that it be included as Uh tools that continue to be available to us. So the specific section of that law That provides for those four possible those areas of exception So I guess my question is to city attorney Um And I wasn't sure if you were ready for my question. Thank you Um, my question is if it's referenced in the ordinance, isn't that still available to us? Like i'm trying to understand that difference. So i'm clear in In an informed decision here What we're requesting in this ordinance I think the way the ordinance is Drafted currently it does not incorporate the exception language of six five eight six three point two b So as I understood the the motion It was to essentially add language To that section that essentially says um To 220 is currently says off-street parking and loading requirements set forth This part shall not apply to a ag or b development within one half mile of a major transit stop but that's the that's the Qualifier that the exception shall not apply to any lodging use and I understood the motion to Mean that language would be added to the effect that the exception would not apply to any lodging use or where the city's authorized to Um enforce minimum auto park parking requirements by Section six five eight six three point two b So then should it choose to do so? So then my my follow-up question is my understanding is there are no Examples of where that would apply in the residential realm, so it I Will say that's not what I heard. I heard that there are few I didn't hear them say there are none The other thing I heard just if we can colloquy here for a second is that The reason I'm interested in this had miss brown not made that I would have asked that we do that my thinking on this is We're We're adopting a local ordinance to operationalize a state statute That it is in my view the state statute Is an overreach The degree to which the state statute contains any kind of relief valve that either we As a legislative body improving something Want to want to avail ourselves of or somebody else wants to avail themselves of it I don't want them to have to go search in the state law for it If they're looking at our ordinance about what are the parking Authorities here that we have discretionary authority that we have let's make sure they can read that in our ordinance That that is the world we are contained in but there are in fact some Circumstances under which parking can be required That's what at least I was interested in having that not referenced But instead included in our ordinance. That was my thinking on it Thank you Thank you Any others Mr. Butler Thank you, mayor kealy guessing you're not just there to hang around at the podium I wanted to clarify. I I do not see any instances in which we could apply this to residential So I want to be clear about that but it could apply to commercial I also would say that if it is the will of the council. I think that we could Specify the exact language now And avoid the need for a second reading if the council is of the opinion that They would like to make sure we do that I suspect you're correct. I want to make sure we can amend we can amend the ordinance here As long as we have the specific language then we can adopt it Because this is the first reading now is the opportunity to make changes those changes. It's coming back anyway It will come back if you make changes today. We'll come back as a man. Yeah, okay. Thank you. Thank you So would you would you like me to let me see if what we can do Can I ask you about your motion for a moment here? My thought is that we would include 65 863.2 ABC All of the above yeah all of it, okay Rather than sort of pulling something out of it that that it would be in its entirety there not the entire statute, but this portion That is I'm amenable to that and I'm happy to amend the motion to request or to to Recommend the staff recommendation with the addition of that language Then we get I think where you want to go if we can if we can do that legally Now we don't have to refer to be clear here the exception language is exclusively within subdivision b of that section A and c are the are the limitations imposed by the states understood And and my my interest in that is that a and c provide you the context In which b allows you to have exemptions under some Under some circumstances. Well, I think that that's sandwich. So to speak makes sense to put in I think that's a preference call here. Yeah, that is that is a council preference two ways to do it would be to simply incorporate the language of Just to invoke 658 65863.2 b Another way to do it would be to paste that language from the statute into the code. So that's a council preference. Yeah, and I think that I would prefer The language in rather than by reference because that's where you get into this thing now you have to go to the code And in that event, I would suggest that we bring it back for second reading Very good I'll retract that amended motion Say it again I guess I'll I'll retract my amendment and and would then Stick with the original motion which was to ask staff to return to council with an amended ordinance That incorporates the language from section 65863.2 of ab 2097 Is there a second The second by the vice mayor debate or discussion So what's the alternative that would have us have this be the first reading the alternative is just to reference it and the only reason I say that is that if we're going to Cut and paste language from the code I want to make sure that it makes sense in the context of the whole ordinance otherwise The alternative would be to simply incorporate by reference 65863.2 b Right, so that's the alternative is to right just reference it That's right The specific language would be this exception shall not apply to lodging use Or where the city is authorized to enforce minimum auto parking requirements pursuant to subdivision b of government code section 65863.2 I see okay So it would require the reader to do the additional homework of Looking up the statute and Was that what you were going to recommend or propose? I was going to say if we're only incorporating section b It fits cleanly within that exceptions part of our code that we Referenced but if the council wants to do a through d then I would recommend bringing it back so we can integrate it in Better. I don't think that just dropping a through d from the state code into that exceptions part fits cleanly and so If that's the will of the council then I would agree with the city attorney and say bring it back if the council wants to just reference Subsection b of the state code Then we could make this the first reading drop it into that exception section as written and I think we would be okay there And if I may just ask my colleagues here so the the benefit of of Putting the language in there is is so that the reader doesn't go back to it That's my thought. Yeah, I mean my preference would be to reference it and have the first reading today Because I I see references to other state codes quite often in local ordinances um Because I think we have discussed it pretty thoroughly I'm not sure but it seems like we're fairly on the same page So my preference is to reference it as we do with many other local ordinances, but yeah I'm not gonna I'm not gonna get upset if we don't do it that way Ms. Brown, I am seeing a nod from my second on this motion that Vice mayor golder is also in agreement there seems to believe that it would be prudent to move forward today I recognize mayor the challenge here and it comes up often, especially when it comes to planning code and But I do think that if there's an interest in moving this Forward quickly we we should do that today and I'm willing to Make that as my motion. So I will return to my first amended motion and say I that I'm asking for that We Adopt on a first reading the ordinance With the inclusion of 6586 3.2 b in section 24 Point 12 Point 220 of the city code Second Motion and a second Quick question. Mr. Butler is that where you would like us to place that? You've identified the appropriate place That's correct. I just want to make sure under 24.12.2 20 Right there good. We can reference it there and and make this the first reading All right We all good for the debate or discussion Can I make one more comment, please? Because I I do think that the concern that you've raised mayor is an important one And I know it's not for for discussion today, but I would love to see some way space for Talking through how to make these documents more accessible to our the public Where we provide references if not the language maybe links things like that. So I just would love to Talk about that at another point in our work plan Thank you for the debate or discussion Two comments. One is uh planet staff. Thank you very much This is a this is not a minor step in some direction This is a very significant piece of state legislation That's going to have I think profound effects on every local government jurisdiction You've done a very good job on on the staff report and in the presentation today. I thank you for that My issue is not with you. It's it's with the legislature and the governor I think this is a poorly drafted piece of legislation which overreaches Tremendously and I predict that within a single number digit of years maybe one or two or three They're going to find themselves amending this statute Uh, I think the vast overreach. I think that uh I understand what they think they're doing on this Uh, I I do think that there's an unfortunate aspect of this which is Among others with this I get what they're The fines and declares are in this. I get what they are declaring. They are trying to do here And I don't have a bunch of heartache over what they're trying to do here I think they're making a lot of assumptions about consumer behavior Immediately like today tomorrow Next year when we have issues in front of us I think they're making vast assumptions that are unproven so far I think what is likely to happen and I think mr. Butler Reference it accurately. I think that what you will see is that the private sector Will base its decision on parking based on What they believe to be market choices and and responding to a market Uh, I I think what will happen in that Is that They will if they choose to do any parking they will do it. They believe enough parking is If they're wrong on that what's going to happen is that the profits get privatized and the problem gets socialized That's what's going to happen here We're going to end up being the ones that are going to be under pressure to find public money To build whatever inadequacy the public perceives there to be in the parking space in that issue So we will pass this We really don't have choices. This is how we operationalize a state law We all swore that we would uphold that and we will uphold that that doesn't mean we have to agree with it all Clerk will call the roll Runner aye Calentary johnson. Hi vice mayor golder. Hi and Hi motion passes in this order. Thank you all very much for your excellent work today. We're on item 17 This is an appointment to the planning commission I I nominate john mckelvey. There's a motion for mr. McKelvie. Is there a second? second by miss By the vice mayor are there other nominations? Miss busher looking at me. Do I need to do something here? We okay. Okay on this. All right. Uh, are there other nominations? Seeing and hearing none the clerk. Yeah, I do want to just clarify. This is an outlarge Yes, we understand that. Yes. Thank you very much though. Yes No further debate or discussion clerk will call the roll on the nomination of john mckelvie We probably have members of the public Here to speak to Please let's hear from them. Good afternoon or not I thought we would but oh Okay, we have okay. Anybody with us. No. All right. Clerk will call the roll Councilmember newson. Hi Brown. Hi what can I sooner? Hi Calentary johnson. Hi vice mayor golder. Hi, mayor keely. Hi motion carries us to water We are on item number Just thank you vice mayor Following our early evening recess councils back in session we are on item 18 This is a downtown parking rates and parking requirement update. Good afternoon. Good afternoon, mayor and council I'm claire globally the transportation planner for the city. I'm joined by heather soyer our parking programs manager And we are excited to go through our proposed updates to the downtown parking rate strategy Thank you miss bush Hey, so we are in action um This evening we're going to go through the background of how we came to this item What the elements of the parking rate strategy are the various scenarios that we considered the work We did with an ad hoc subcommittee of the downtown Commission as well as the downtown commission and get to the recommendation for a five-year plan moving forward So to start and orient us all this applies to the downtown parking district on the right of your screen You'll see a map of the district boundaries. Um, the downtown parking district was formed in 1956 And it's an enterprise fund So it's a user supported the funds that are generated within the district stay within the district to fund all maintenance and operations and a bunch of other things um It has the downtown commission as the advisory body to council on that so we've done significant work with them to date Within the downtown we have reduced parking requirements Compared to outside of downtown the requirements inside downtown are 30 to 70 percent lower With ab 2097 that we've talked about extensively today Those essentially go away for all uses except for hotel uses um, we do have a concentrated supply of parking in downtown outside of downtown Almost every single building supplies their own parking for their own uses Within the downtown the purpose of the district is for the supply to be shared the city to supply it Therefore, we have a fewer number of spaces that are used at a higher efficiency That are provided by the city and are funded by user fees So what does the parking fund pay for I like to say all of the above What you see on the screen it is the people that operate at landscaping storm drains graffiti Biohazards all the public restrooms that are available downtown are non auto programs to grow Santa Cruz sidewalk scrubbing pressure washing support for the downtown streets team and the trolley and Zillings of other things so it's parking and it's all the things that help make our downtown Wonderful livable and a place that we all want to be It's very important to have this fund be well supported So how did we get here? We last updated our five-year parking rate strategy in 2018 We are spot on five years later for that five-year update um at the time of the work we did in 2018 that was the same time coming off of the Council's work Specific to housing and the housing blueprint subcommittee and community voices on housing The goals that came out of that were specific to housing production To sunset the deficiency fee to fund a non auto program our go Santa Cruz program and to construct a new supply on lot four We made many changes at that time to our parking Requirements downtown and our rate structure downtown in order to make it Easier to build housing downtown we allowed for a hundred percent of your parking requirements to be located off-site We updated our parking in luffy and we Started a five-year sunset of the parking deficiency fee for businesses in order to facilitate the goals of the housing blueprint subcommittee Uh, we had a great plan everything looked great and then 2020 hit And covid came And at that time we suspended all rate collection as you probably remember the gates were up We weren't collecting anything in the meters We pressed pause on collecting any deficiency fees on our five-year sunset plan And we had no money coming in this was a strategic policy decision by the city and by council to do everything that we could to support our Struggling and floundering downtown business sector to remove any barrier to people coming downtown As well as to increase safety for the parking staff. We have a staff of about 80 fte's give or take seasonally This Had big trade-offs. We were able to achieve the policy goals that we had to support downtown businesses but at the same time it tanked the parking enterprise fund and That's one of the reasons that we're here today because that has lasting impacts and doing what we're doing is is not an option anymore The next thing it came is ab 2097, which we talked a lot about today Essentially eliminates parking requirements for most uses in the district So we had previously changed around the way that we did parking to incentivize the use of the in luffy Which ranged from $5,000 of space for affordable housing units at the lowest level To $20,000 of space for market rate or non residential uses. We had tiered to incentivize affordable housing That was one of the fund sources that we're anticipating coming into the parking enterprise fund to pay for maintenance and operations and everything else that we do With the elimination of being able to require parking. We are no longer going to be collecting that fee for almost all new uses coming in None of those uses by state law can have required parking on site And so, uh, mary kealy as you mentioned it becomes a a social issue That uh, it is our job to maintain and provide the parking for downtown that supports not only the residents but also employees and businesses And finally, we're moving to a place beyond covet now. We're calling it recovery or building and resiliency Where we need to dig our way out from the hole that covet put us in Tried a course for fiscal sustainability and think about the next rainy day that we may have and how to establish A better reserve fund in order to be able to weather those things Right now the revenue sources that come into the district about 88 percent of those are user fees So that's the money that you put in the meter. That's what you pay permits. That's what you pay at a pay station at a garage Um your daily rate and it comes from our readers are lots in our structures and our permits We have other minor revenues coming in from Rents in the the spaces that we have in our parking structures that are have retail and restaurants Um some from inlu fees we in this we don't have deficiency fees, but normally we would Um taxes and other minor things but the the big takeaway is that 88 percent of our user our revenue is already user fees And that's what we have doing the majority of supporting our parking enterprise fund This is going to go to Probably closer to 95 with the elimination of parking requirements and the inability to recover funds from developers So what are the components of a rate strategy and what goes into this we built out a extensive parking model parking financial model that takes A bunch of pieces into account The first is revenue from meters. We have on-street meters that have Multiple rate structures the meters in the most convenient locations front and center on pacific are the most expensive The meters further outside from downtown are less expensive. The point of this is to incentivize people who are We do not know that. Oh, yeah I'll show you a meter map sometime Yeah, I'll show you how to park cheaper Um, so yeah right down on downtown right on pacific avenue. There are um Those are most expensive meters as you get further away. Those are more affordable Um lots and structures. So those are both our garages that we have as well as our surface parking lots those have a lower rate than our on-street spaces the point is that We want you if you are staying longer to park in one of our lots or garages And if you're coming for a quick trip We set the pricing higher on-street in the most desirable areas to incentivize turnover So there there should be at least one space available per block space So you can make those convenient trips into our downtown local businesses and this is in line with parking bus practices in the industry The next piece is permits. You can only get a permit downtown if you live or work downtown it's an important thing to consider and We'll get into this more later, but permits are Really our discount available for parking downtown Our parking permits currently cost 65 a month if you were to park Very affordable because if you were to park on an average 20 day Working month and pay the daily rate you'd be paying 200 dollars per month. So our existing parking permits offer a Giant discount over paying the daily rate And that really is to support our downtown workforce So those are all revenue coming in the next things we're going to go to our revenue going out Um, the first is a new supply project on lot four and that's actually both revenue coming in and revenue going out In order to fund that project we would finance it and so in our parking model we do anticipate Bonding for that project and all associated costs After that project comes online. We do build in revenue coming in in the most conservative fashion possible From both new hourly and daily parkers and new permits that we could sell there The next is operations and maintenance with a new facility that does increase the amount of Number of facilities and complexity of facilities that we need to maintain. So we did add in that increased cost We also put in the cost of personnel supply services capital investments that we make averaged at about 600 000 dollars per year to maintain and expand our our district facilities and In this model we began to establish a reserve fund for the parking enterprise fund Which we have not had in the past and that we feel is very important I've grown up in like the series of emergencies that have happened And so looking forward hoping hoping that we can get that reserve fund so that we do have a little more wiggle room when When bad things inevitably happen And finally another thing going out is to maintain stable funding for our go Santa Cruz program which offers Non-auto incentives for all downtown workforce and looking ahead to potentially being able to expand that to residents as well So going through um in this presentation I'm going to go through the status quo scenario and the recommended scenario your packet includes Uh the four scenarios that we did consider But seeing that we got a unanimous recommendation from the downtown commission I'm going to focus on the scenario that was recommended and I'm happy to answer questions on the other scenarios So what we're doing right now is that permits cost 75 a month Meters range from a dollar to a dollar 50 an hour or permits cost 65 dollars a month and we have a previous approval To increase that to 75 dollars a month in fy 24. That would be a july 1 change Meters are dollar to dollar 50 lots are 125 an hour with a maximum daily rate of 10 dollars And the summary to this is that we have a negative cash flow We'll continue to have a negative cash flow And if we continue doing what we are doing we will be in the whole over 10 million dollars in the next five years The key takeaway I hope that you get from this is that status quo is not an option and we need to make a change Which brings us to the recommended scenario and I'll I'll get into How we got here, but what the recommended scenario is that came from the downtown commission is To only implement the previously approved permit increase to 75 dollars a month To increase pricing on and off street by 75 cents an hour on meters that would result in 175 to 225 In lots and garages it would result in two dollars an hour And increase the daily rate in lots and garages from 10 dollars to 16 dollars What this would do is create positive cash flow in fy 24 Both positive cash flow and starting to fund a positive fund balance And we would be positive all the way out through fy 28 Including bonding and financing a new supply project. This puts us in incredibly stable footing to be able to Continue to operate and maintain the district that we have and to be able to do Other nice to have things that have been on on the sidelines continue our sidewalk scrubbing program our downtown beautification and everything else that supports downtown We did look at a series of comparable cities and the key takeaway here from all this information is that our user fees are Pretty spot-on or recommended user fees with what we see in Monterey, Santa Barbara, San Luis Bisto and San Jose Some cities are a little more affordable some are a little more expensive Key thing is that our permit pricing is significantly lower than many of these cities And that was something that was incredibly important to the downtown commission as we talked through this We've heard big issues with recruitment and retention of employees and in hiring And that parking being one of the barriers to doing that and so making sure that we maintained Permit parking for employees that was affordable enough for it to make it worth it to come work downtown So the work that we did to get here There is a standing ad hoc revenue subcommittee of the downtown commission. It's currently Beth Cara Daniel Nelson and Joe Ferrara And we initially had a a scenario one which you'll you'll see in your packet and they made that recommendation They were mainly concerned about the loss of supply downtown An increase in demand with the new development that we're going to be seeing and the changes in state law and really wanting to Maintain what we have and to be able to do the things that we want to do They also wanted to explore future expert Future exploration for additional revenue sources for other things that are nice to do in in future items, but not today So they made that recommendation when we went back to the full downtown commission And the downtown commission had a great discussion about this item They really wrestled with it and they decided that they wanted to do a scenario 1a The only change being we had had a recommendation to increase permits to $85 per month Um in fy 25 and the downtown commission felt strongly that we should keep that at 75 dollars a month as previously approved But that we should increase the max daily rate from 10 dollars to 16 dollars per day In line with the the hourly increases that we were seeing Uh, they felt strongly that we should implement all the rate increases for lots and meters in fy 24 Compared to some of the scenarios that had a multi-step increase Because they felt that it was more user friendly to do it just once They felt like it would be easier on the business community to only explain it once and go through it once And it would be easier for us operationally to just make that switch once So they came very comfortable With that. I'm sorry. We had our chair here earlier, but she had to leave to pick up her children and uh, she was Wanted me to let you know that they are heavily in favor of this support moving forward with it are very concerned about The financial situation of the parking district and can't speak strongly enough about wanting to move forward So the recommendation is in your packet and on the screen here it involves A lot of things to make this change There are two resolutions and an ordinance that need to be adopted to move this forward The ordinance would need to come for a second reading and then go into effect 30 days after that the goal would be for these Great changes to go into effect in july to align with our new fiscal year As well as our summer tourist season And to to rape the benefits of the increases there it also aligns with when we're implementing the 75 dollars a month of permit increases And um a key thing here is this does really capture the changes that we've seen in state law and enable us to be on firm financial footing So with that I will turn it over to you. Uh, we're available for any questions and Anything I can't answer. I know Heather is more than capable. So thank you. Well, thank you very much for that presentation Let me see if there are questions from council I have one short quick question. Um Thank you And my question is and I think I've mentioned this before but I got a ticket in another city I don't remember where huntington beach or somewhere down south a parking ticket and on the ticket There was like a one of those codes you can scan with your phone And I was able to pay it right then in there and then the tickets I've gotten here in santa cruz It's been a pain and I go down there and then maybe the counters open Maybe it's not and um and not that I'm trying to eliminate jobs But it seems like that's a cheaper way of operating as maybe you lose staff through Attrition or retirement or whatever is to consolidate and make it more efficient in paying your fines I could save a buck Okay, so So I'm wondering is that possible So currently we are actually finishing our last install downtown Right now at locust garage and once um that equipment gets going We do have things like qr codes and stuff like that going on That's for the garage now when you're talking about the parking citations We will be upgrading our current enforcement program so that which goes in hands with our lpr program. So we need license plate recognition Yes And so with that We should be able to finally accept some online payments through that mode That's part of our goal too instead of just having to go in online through the website and do things that way or at the window It's an extra plug to be able to fund our capital investment program so that we can move into the you know current times Councilmember brown Thank you mayor. Thank you for the presentation and and all of the work that you have put into Creating these scenarios. I know it's a lot of work and you present it in a way that makes it look very Clear and kind of seamless, but I'm sure it's been a long haul I wanted to ask if could we take a look at the table again with the comparisons because I thought I saw one of the Communities that was listed one of the jurisdictions has some Um for low income Permit holders who earn less than minimum wage Um, it was like the city by city Yes, here we go. So the um san josey it half price permit for employees earning less than minimum wage time Plus a 30 percent increment and and that was really interesting to me We have um, as you know, a lot of businesses downtown that Are service jobs and and the employees downtown who are not Making enough to absorb these kinds of increases And I think that many of them can and will and and we all and we should But there are people who this is going to be a significant hardship And so I'm just wondering about What we might be able to do about that love that question as Heather mentioned We're currently updating our technology right now and then we'll be testing it and getting everything ready with what we Currently have before the upgrade We don't have the ability to do that functionally the new technology enables us enables us to have multiple Types of permits and our goal is to bring you back something in f y 25 You ever take In order to be able to do that another Element that we would like to bring back is a residential permit for off-peak as we're having more residents downtown We know that we have more capacity in our structures and our lots during the nighttime hours And we would love to be able to better utilize that And so really one of our next projects is looking at a variety of past programs passing permit programs that we could implement So it is on our radar We can't quite do it yet and we feel like we've been saying that for a long time But we're finally getting this technology built in and we hope to be able to bring you back something soon councilmember brooder Thank you Thank you and thank you for asking that question because that is one of the questions that I did ask as well and Thank you for responding to some of my questions ahead of time And I know that economic development department also is looking at the cost for employee permit parking Especially some creative models down the line for if you're a part time versus full time right and and looking at that kind of equity Issue So yes, let's keep on that and I really appreciate The Breaking apart all the components of of this and and all the scenarios that the commission looked at um Because I know there were a lot of factors that you know, you choose this it affects this and you choose that it affects this and and keeping um It to Narrow it down to this scenario. I'm Um in support of so my question It actually came up with vice mayor golders Comment Parking citations don't those go to the general fund and not the parking district? Yes, we do want to make it as easy as possible to pay them, but they do not come into the parking enterprise fund We still want to make it easy for you Okay And parking enforcement Is that also separate from the parking? I mean The staff is that part of the 80 fte? Right. So parking enforcement is mainly general fund. Yeah, okay But we do there are is some funding and they're from the district Of course because they do enforce in the district. So the portion of that Of district funds pay for personnel and other enforcement tools that are used within district And um, my last question is um, I know this is specific to parking district one um What are the considerations in other areas where we have parking? I know the wharf is one place other parts of the city um, is there um Anything there wharf is probably coming next as we have that conversation It's it's a little more complicated because it has to do with coastal commission there and some other stuff We have going on but that's on our radar other parts of the city one of the things we have on our work program is to work on Overall curb management which goes into lots of what you talked about today of how do you manage spillover parking? How do you manage increased parking demand? How do you manage parking areas? Where people really want to be and people currently are and that friction between What's here now and what's to come and how it used to be? And so we we're considering all of that. Thank you so much. Thank you Councilmember Watkins Yes, thank you for your work and for your presentation And I remember having the conversation about the equity permit So I appreciate you bringing that back up in terms of how do we tailor this for those that need it? So it's nice to hear that it's going to be forthcoming and Obviously understandable given the circumstances over the past several years My question is in relationship to the meters and some of them being still only quarters How many are those and I'm asking because I've had a couple of people really upset Especially if they had a permit came downtown was trying to do some shopping like on pacific Um, and I think right near Kind of the Abbott square. I'm like spacing on what that street is Cooper street. Thank you. Um And and and not having enough quarters and then getting a ticket especially so anyways I'm just curious as we're upgrading where that falls and I think I I So is the question just are there other options to pay the meters How many meters? Yes, and how many are only quarters still and if there are other options Especially with some of the upgrades and our cash losses. Yeah, so they do Hey, so like our change machines downtown think about their dollar coins dollar coins or quarters all denominations downtown the beach is only dollar and quarters um, we also have Currently we have the ones with credit card on pacific avenue. That was a pilot A long pilot. It's been delayed on making changes down there. We're um Actually, some of the other next things on our list is to look at incorporating the like the pay-by-space machines Like we have on the surface lots Putting those on street So one getting rid of hopefully a whole bunch of Furniture as you want to call it, you know decor downtown get rid of meters But those they'll cover, you know one on block faces that will have everything from bringing back the park card to pacific avenue, which we don't have currently because of those particular meters um park mobile credit card cash For the ones that don't have any other options, I wonder We do all the other ones. They do have park card and park mobile So you can pay by phone you can pay with a park card or with coin on all the other ones On all the other ones outside of the a few off of pacific avenue, correct I just wonder if that's something to think about in terms of prioritizing more modernization of those and that We are wanting turnover and people don't have coins and anyways, I've had several complaints about right Another reason why this is so important because the costs involved on bringing true smart meters in that Are cloud-based and all of that and um it helps with enforcement plus the for the customers Yeah, thank you for bringing that connection. Yeah, I really appreciate it for the questions This would be the opportunity for member of the public to uh address us on this matter Let me if anybody is going to come forward. Let me reinforce what miss glulie said Generally dolin had requested who is chair of the downtown commission If she could be the first person to speak on this I think she thought we might have gotten finished with the other one a little earlier, but I want to Uh respect the fact that she did make that request and that request uh was granted to her Thank you for pointing out how supportive had she been here what she would have said So thank you for that. Is there anyone with us who wishes to comment miss bush? Do we have anyone online? Let's take the person online. Then you're up next sir Okay Hey, I'm fascinated by the logic the city uses to justify milking the public like a cash cow In all sorts of ways like parking other fees and it's monopolies like utilities I would note if I read this right you are permanently really jacking parking rates because of a A one-time temporary reduction in parking income during covid, which I would mention you did receive A ton of covid stemmy money that maybe you should have offset compensated that and b You haven't raised rates in a while which really isn't much of a reason and c and anticipated reduction Gets of in lieu fee income from not being able to charge development parking in lieu fees within a half a mile of a transit location Assuming there will be less parking development. I'm curious about in lieu fees in so far as I assume for instance Like the new street tree ordinance if somebody doesn't replace a tree you charge a 1700 dollar in lieu fee Which presumably I wonder gets put into a sole use protected finance account only and will only be used to plant another tree I assume otherwise, of course, it'd just be a simple money grab I wonder if in lieu fees related to not developing parking were put into such a special sole purpose account And then uh, was it actually used only to service parking perhaps your finance director could comment How much is in that account right now? Otherwise, of course, it'd be a simple money grab However, now in this case, it is not the offending developer paying the fee is then to be everybody else Being made to pay the developer's portion by higher parking fees to this end And again, I wonder if finance could comment on how this money has to be precisely separated out isolated and its use track The intended purpose of servicing only parking in appropriate equal amounts Otherwise, of course, it'd just be a simple money grab I fail to see the actual math disclose justifying exactly the rate heights suggested But in reality, I probably don't really really really want to look too close under the utters of government operations involved in milking the public like a cash cow I also don't really get why people parking somewhere else should help pay for the library parking lot Doesn't it want to be its own cash cow? Uh, you know, do you consider using parking fees for other than parking related services and end around voter approval of higher taxes? Because I kind of do Uh, the ordinance preparer deserves an attigirl and an academy award nomination in the category Of creative justification of milking the public like a cash cow in an ordinance category Although from ordinance to ordinance that is a very competitive category Including the child care development fee the street tree Ordinance green consultation building fees. So it might not win. But yes, the nomination is in order Uh, it might not also win an award because it is leaving some money on the table I'm not recommending it. But if I were you if you know what that means I would demand paid registration of all city bicycles to ride or park on public city streets or lots And pass out big fines for illegal parking confiscate unregistered bicycles with jack You'd have jackola like Niagara Falls. It might even pay for public bike parking spaces instead of the long people with car owners Thanks Thank you, sir Anyone else miss bush online anyone who's with us wish to provide comment matter is back before the council Motion would be in order. So moved. I'll move the recommendation as presented by staff Motion the staff report is moved or the staff recommendation is moved miss brunner seconds Is there a debate or discussion on this matter? So you're hearing none the clerk will call the roll Council member is new some I brown I what kind I? Brunner I Helen Torrey Johnson. Hi nice mayor golder. Hi and mayor keely. Hi Motion passes and so ordered item 19 has been continued to our meeting of april 25th This is the opportunity for oral communication. This would be the opportunity For anyone to address us on a matter under our jurisdiction, but not on today's agenda. Good afternoon, sir Good evening. My name is james ewing wittman. I want to thank the staff on number 18 and 16 for the diversity of how they presented information I would say if I Disagreed with number 16. I agreed with number 18 I guess enough said obviously I'm here because I Well, who knows Because I care I guess could be a community service, you know talking about the military weapons, which I can't really talk about the transportation Everything talking about the electrification Wonder how many people that have teslas are actually using emf meters to see actually how toxic those things are I mean Only things that I know that are more toxic than driving in a teslas having your smartphone right next to your head We're using earbuds So I go to a lot of circles and there's one I attend on sundays saturdays. That's um Musical the guy who's presenting has been teaching music for more than 62 years A lot of professional teachers go to him for training if there's 14 people there It's not uncommon for nine of those people to be over 73. It's quite a fun group Handed a article Or a little flyer that had eight articles in it and I chose to read the one on aquarius Or the age of aquarius, excuse me, and they were just all these one liners Something I was reminded of Is as earth rotates around the sun once a year. That's our calendar year Pluto rotates around the sun every 248 years So it's going to come around again in 2024 about 248 years ago was 1776 And I'm holding this citizens rule book Um I've given away a lot of copies particularly to youth who seem fascinated in the book If anybody wants to look at I've got six seconds They can find a lot of great information in the basement library of the building Nice to see you guys. I'm late to go somewhere else Today was nice. Thank you guys. Well, thank you very much. Have a nice evening, sir That's a plan you guys too. Very good. Thank you, sir Mr. Kandadi further business coming for the council Further business come before we do you have two um one person online two people online two people online Let's hear the first one. Good afternoon Yeah, this is Garrett again Hey, I have 23 questions that I never should have had to ask about that 127 million dollar down payment blank check water bond But do because instead we got a minimalist unsatisfactory Presentation and then we heard absolutely crickets from all of you I won't recite now what those are but I did email them to you as uh, there's no time to do that right here This bond and like others is totalitarian does not require a vote of the people But considering the price tag does morally require beyond a doubt detailed justification as to need proof of selection of a comparatively best project design And a most convincing fact-based metric analysis that the resulting performance is definitely worth every cent of the cost And I mean with data specs, you know like proof The presentation didn't do that and then you charged with public interest motivated oversight proxy You didn't ask or demand anything at all nothing Note sands a public vote. This is federal government grade involuntary debt slavery I hold the mayor more responsible for this information vacuum as his is a policy of preferring council not ask questions publicly Even though they're exposed in proxy for the people and his demand of 15 minutes or less Presentation the people deserve better detailed answers, especially of a monopoly utility There was obfuscation in the water bond presentation as in unlike buying a house There was no truth in lending statement and never mentioned the total cost completion of these projects Which I'm left to assume is 300 million at 3.9 interest, which is then about 600 million dollars Forty year debt obligation We will be paying on for the rest of our lives and half the lives of the unborn About which my crude guess amounts to about four to five hundred dollars a year extra per average water user Which is about a month's groceries. I found the director's answer to the question of water rate bites evasive Saying only rates will be adjusted Most of the project is fear mongering justification. It's now You know, this is a very expensive insurance policy for something that has never happened running out of water Please read those questions and I think the director should answer them. Thanks Thank you, sir One more miss bush Good evening Good evening Good evening Darius Moson in here While the progressives in the federal government are working on Medicare for all do you think santa city of santa cruz could work on public bulky item pickup for all what I mean by that is units homes and apartment complexes of four or less units get tagged get free bulky item pickup but used to be the tags Now it's a phone call five or more units They don't get there's no bulky item pickup. They have to pay like 30 dollars to take a couch or a mattress What is this? What's the consequences? They're setting couches mattresses out around the city on the sidewalk and guess where they end up Bench lands or whatever positive camps are out there so How to fund this I've said this before in meetings. We pay a ridiculously low rate for the landfill The minimum rate is something like $27 and 41 cents. I took a load a trailer to The Sunnyvale dump. They wanted 250 bucks that same trailer. I can get through the dump with stuff here for about 4550 there should be The minimum charge For the demulane facility shouldn't be should not be less than 40 dollars. I don't think anybody would blink And I think we could do you know out for the bulky item pickup for Majority of really I think Santa Cruz, you know, or a good a good chunk of Santa Cruz residents that have the same needs for Disposing couches and mattresses Anyway, thank you Well, thank you very much miss bush all finished online No one else with us today motion to adjourn would be in order vice mayor moves to adjourn and miss brown seconds And motions not debatable those in favor signify by saying I opposed Are you sure?