 Okay, it's one o'clock so we'll go ahead and get started. All the meeting to order. Good afternoon, welcome to our welcome to our 1pm session of the October 26, 2021 meeting of the Santa Cruz City Council. I have a few announcements and then we will move on to our meeting. Today's meeting is being broadcast live on community television channel 25 and streaming on the city's website city of Santa Cruz calm. If you wish to comment on an item agenda item today call in at the beginning of the item on the screen. You are wanting to comment on using the instructions that are given on your screen. Please mute your television or streaming device once you call in and listen through the phone. Please note there is a delay in streaming. So if you continue to listen on your television or streaming device, you may miss your opportunity to speak. It is time for the public to call for public comment. Press star nine on your phone to raise your hand. When it is your time to speak during public comment, you will hear an announcement that you have been unmuted. The timer will then be set to two minutes. You may hang up once you have comment on your item of interest. And I would like to ask the clerk to please call the roll. Thank you mayor councilmember Watkins here. I'm sorry Johnson here. Brown here. Coming is currently absent. Holder here. Mayor Bruder present. Mayor Myers present. Thank you, Bonnie. Now move on to our presentations today. And we have three presentations. I'll read the proclamations for each one. And then I will invite council members if they would like to make a few comments. They're welcome to do that. As we should have a little bit of time for that today. The first proclamation is a proclamation recognizing Mimi hall and declaring October 27 2021 as Mimi holiday in the city of Santa Cruz. Make whereas Mimi hall is departing county service after more than two decades of public service in California's local health jurisdictions and is deserving of the city's acclaim recognition and gratitude. And whereas Mimi hall is the daughter of immigrants who followed her parents footsteps into the health care field she began her public health career working to reduce the prevalence of communicable disease and previously served as public health director in Sierra Plumas and Yolo counties. And whereas Mimi hall has been a tireless advocate for improving health outcomes through innovation improved effectiveness, elevating the spectrum of prevention and serving with kindness while grounded in pursuit of equity. And whereas Mimi hall served during a crucial period in history, leading Santa Cruz County through the COVID-19 pandemic by coordinating with the local health care system and community partners to minimize harm, resulting in a pandemic response that has saved lives in Santa Cruz County and limited and in many cases eliminated inequities, eventually fostering one of the highest county vaccine rate vaccination rates in California. And whereas Mimi hall led the with courage and conviction and demanded compassion in the face of difficulty and vitriol that led to the well deserved 2021 pen and venison courage award. And whereas Mimi hall is former president of the county health executives Association of California, which includes public health directors from California's 58 counties and three local city health jurisdictions. He has also been a key contributor to the National Association of city and county health officials, Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, the American Public Health Association, the Rural Policy Research Institute, the California Department of Public Health emergency preparedness office, local health department leadership group, and a number of local boards and commissions. And whereas Mimi halls passion and service driven work ethic built trust and collaboration with dozens of partners in the community from educational institutions and health systems to nonprofit organizations and cities. And whereas Mimi hall is an inspiration to our community through her leadership with graciousness, equity advocacy and integrity, all while utilizing data and science to inform decisions. And whereas Mimi hall and her family will remain in Santa Cruz County. And we look forward to working alongside her as she continues to contribute to the community in new and important ways. Now there for I Donna Myers mayor and see if Santa Cruz do hereby proclaim October 27 2021 is Mimi hall day in the city of Santa Cruz and encourage all residents to join me in recognizing and thanking her for her decades of exceptional civil service and honoring her significant contributions to the community. So congratulations Mimi. I don't know is she on I can't quite tell. I don't, I don't know. No case probably something came up. Well, I'm very honored to recognize Mimi she has just done an extraordinary job as our health officer and and excuse me in her role with the county. And she, you know, she she was just absolutely critical to what what was, you know, how happening with the county and with our community during the COVID-19 so really, really excited to present this to her. I know council member calm sorry Johnson I think you requested to have some time to speak about Mimi as well. Yeah, I just a few words I know Mimi's not here she's probably out doing something really important for the community as she always does but hopefully she'll have the opportunity to see this recording. I've had the privilege and honor to work with Mimi and serve on some boards and commissions with Mimi. I think this resolution really did capture it well but a couple of other things that I want to acknowledge about Mimi is that she does everything within her D and grace, and a holistic view of what's needed for the community. Her definition of health and well being is both broad and specific so that we can really respond to what the needs of the diverse needs of our community are so she will be very very missed in her role here in the community. But I know that she'll go out and do amazing things and hopefully we will, as a city and community continue to be able to cross paths and work with her so thank you Mimi for all your work. It's just it's been a privilege and honor to have you here. Thank you council member. Okay. The next one we're going to move on to is a mayor's proclamation recognizing Maggie Ivy and I see Maggie Ivy's here, which is great. As after 26 years of service at visit Santa Cruz County, a private nonprofit organization dedicated to showing off the wonders of the region, bringing in visitors and boosting the local economy in the process. CEO and executive vice president Maggie Ivy is retiring effective upon the hiring of her successor. While working in a coastal community in California was on Maggie Ivy's professional bucket list. And she loved that Santa Cruz was a real tourism town that depended on the tourism economy. But it was also not a huge destination small enough where she could work with a lot of small shop owners and included smaller hotels as well as retail and restaurants. And whereas under Maggie Ivy's leadership, the budget of visit Santa Cruz County grew by over 500%. And in 2010, the first tourism marketing district was approved, which resulted in significant increases in budget resources for expanding marketing and promotional programs and help to advance. Visit Santa Cruz County's long term planning and marketing programs. The resulting tourism market district allowed visit Santa Cruz County to launch a comprehensive strategic plan, including a new branding process yielding the let's cruise tagline. And whereas during Maggie Ivy's tenure visit Santa Cruz County developed wide ranging right ranging and effective shoulder season campaigns to increase regional drive market visitation during non summer months. For example, the king tides that Santa Cruz experiences in the wintertime fostered a stronger collaboration with visit California and develop long term initiatives to remote Santa Cruz County to overseas markets. As a result, visitation statistics indicated a more diversified visitor base growing international visitors to the county from 8% to 13% pre pandemic. In addition, Maggie Ivy embraced the expansion of online digital and social media programs and when combined with more traditional marketing and promotional channels these steady and strategic advances made a significant positive impact on the economic vitality of our region. And whereas in her retirement, Maggie Ivy plans to spend more time with family and friends, travel pursue her hobbies and get involved with a couple of local nonprofits and giving back. Now there for I Donna Myers mayor of the city of Santa Cruz do hereby proclaim October 26 2021 as Maggie Ivy day in the city of Santa Cruz and encourage all residents to join me and expressing heartfelt appreciation for her numerous contributions and her dedicated and exemplary service and wishing her well in her retirement. And Maggie, you and I met, gosh, I don't know probably 20 years ago, working on the Monterey Bay Sanctuary Opportunity Study and I just found your enthusiasm and your, your embracing of what Santa Cruz was and what it could offer you know it wasn't it wasn't just the hotels it was the environment the nature the trails, the food. And I think your vision really has shaped you know who we've become and who the world thinks of you know what they think about us when they think about Santa Cruz so I've just been so inspired by the work that you do over the years and I feel like you've held our name. You've held our name to the world, and you've really helped Santa Cruz become what it's become and people around the world when they hear the word sent you're from Santa Cruz that you are always met with a smile. And with a look of envy because many people around the world think of this as as really an amazing place. So not only am I proud to issue this proclamation but I'm also even more proud to give you a key to the city today. And so this is the key to the city of Santa Cruz. These are given out really to people who have impact make impact on the city of Santa Cruz during their time here and I can't think of a better person to recognize with the key to the city so we'll definitely get this to you in person. But I'm really proud to also give you this in recognition of really putting us on the map and really keeping the character of Santa Cruz in doing that and not losing sight of who we are. And so congratulations I hope you enjoy everything in your retirement and I would you know offer any council members that have any comments today. Please feel free to take a few seconds here and if you'd like so congratulations Maggie and August if you have anything to say we'd love to hear as well. Oh thank you Donna. Wow I'm so touched a key to the city to. I can't wait to hear what it gets me into all kinds of glamorous places. Well I just want to thank all the council members. The support of our elected officials over the years has just meant the world to me and I remember when I first moved here thinking I didn't always agree with all of our our electeds but I really liked everybody I was working with and I just felt this sense of community so thank you all and Sonya and Sandy and Martin for serving on the board. And I also just want to say Cynthia Matthews Mike Rodkin Scott Kennedy are dearly departed people that just really stepped up and you know we have any resort town has kind of a complicated relationship with tourism and it really requires leadership and champions to help balance that conversation about how we make it work for the community so I just want to thank you all for for doing that and yeah I love this place my career. Help me find my home. I'm very fortunate. Well congratulations Maggie also invite I see Sonya has her hand up so I'll invite her to say a few words. Thank you. That's wonderful to see you here. Maggie thank you so much for your years of service. I just wanted to quickly add in addition to the statistics and the information that Mayor Myers shared. You know when I joined the first time on the board. I think it was 2006. Santa Cruz Conference and Visitors Council. That was the name of it and one thing I always admired about you is you kept. You kept it moving forward. You always had Santa Cruz in mind in terms of diversifying the visitor attraction to Santa Cruz and that included aligning with visit California and hence the name changed to visit Santa Cruz. So some of the reasons really some of the reasons why people visit Santa Cruz and that wasn't just surfing or the ocean the kind of obvious or common reasons but things like wildlife birding and creating a whole brochure. And to this day there are still visitors that come for the wildlife birding aspect you know reaching out to movie directors and having creating a whole section for attracting commercials and movies and just kind of diversity diversifying that visitor engagement with Santa Cruz in a really positive way and and the whole digital online shift has really been amazing under your leadership. Thank you so much Maggie I wish you a wonderful retirement. Thanks for helping to promote Santa Cruz in the way that you have with such a positive spirit. Thank you. Thanks Sonya and Sandy. Thank you mayor. Yeah I would just add in addition to the comments that have been made and the the general sense that we all have about the contributions you've made towards innovation in in really really moving our community forward and with a very strategic approach to how we market our community for tourism and you know being nimble and pivoting when things change and all of that. I also just want to really appreciate your your patients and your willingness to work with council members and I just want to thank you myself. I was a short lived term on visits and it was for me sadly because of a work conflict I couldn't make the meetings anymore. But during the time that I was there serving on that body and just meeting with you. I I learned so much about the experience of our tourism operators and you know and and really just appreciated the way that it's it's just such an energetic group and it's a space where people really work together and I learned so much that you know and it really helped me with kind of rounding out my perspective as well being a council member who talks with you know particular constituents you know often who may not have that same kind of level of of openness or understanding and so it helped me translate for constituents as well and you know just the way you did that with patients and you know real like positivity was was just a wonderful experience and we appreciate all you've done and wish you a wonderful and well deserved retirement. Thank you. And Martin. Oh gosh I can only just echo my colleagues comments about working with you Maggie I'm new to the board and gosh you know I know that you're going to leave really big shoes to fill. I you know the only thing I would add is that your commitment to this community your love of this community your ability to translate that into the work that you do through Visit Santa Cruz County has benefited our community and will continue to benefit our community for years to come so you've definitely left a mark in a legacy and I do think to your point Sandy that should really starts with building relationships and I remember the first time I sat down with you and I just really appreciated you taking the time to explain to me effective and the more we have those conversations the better we move initiatives forward and you've really set that tone for this organization and you have taught me and others I'm sure as as the importance of how we operate in that way so wishing you the absolute best in your retirement and thank you for for your many years of service. Thank you. And Councilmember Cummings. I'm Maggie sorry for being late but the members of the public and Council and staff but you know I just wanted to say my thanks and appreciation for all the work that you've done over the years I met you Santa Cruz diner. When I first got on Council and you're able to you know take me by and show me the organization and then throughout the years it's just been really helpful not only to know that you all are there you know really trying to generate revenue for bringing in tourism but also you know we're trying to have difficult discussions around tax revenues with hotels and even in the pandemic we're thinking about how we should navigate our way through you know tourism and how we have discussions with you know people who may be coming here or organizations that you all have worked with in the past and then just trying to communicate how to communicate our needs around tourism you know during the pandemic. I thought that it was really great to just you know be able to have you there as a resource and to get your perspective on so many of these different issues that really have major impacts on our economy and our community and so and I you know and I don't think Santa Cruz would be as prolific of a town in terms of tourism and all the great things that we have if it weren't for you all so helping to highlight that and I think that it's something that helps our community grow financially and really keeps us moving forward and so just want to thank you for all that you've done over the years to really highlight Santa Cruz which is a worldwide destination world renowned destination. Thank you Council Member. Council Member Collin Tari Johnson. Hi Maggie. I haven't worked with you for very long and I met you a couple times but it's very clear from what my colleagues have said and what I've heard from other community members that you really impacted this community in a very positive way and I think we'll see the impacts for years to come so I just wanted to take the opportunity to thank you directly. Thank you. Well Maggie we know we'll see you around town and I'm sure you have a long list of projects and people who want want you to come help them do the do do good work in our community so make sure you take a few months off before you dive into a lots of volunteer work but I will see you around a few more months but really really excited to celebrate you today. Thank you all it means a lot to me. Okay. Take care Maggie. Thank you. Bye bye. Bye bye. And our final proclamation today is a mayoral proclamation declaring the month of November as Family Court Awareness Month. Whereas in 2020 Family Court Awareness Month was conceptualized by Tina Swithin founder and CEO of One Mom's Battle. And whereas Family Court Awareness Month was fueled by the desire for awareness and change in the family court system and to honor the 800 plus children who have been murdered since 2008 by separating or divorcing parents after a custody court rejected the other parents plea for protection. And whereas the mission of One Mom's Battle and the Family Court Awareness Month committee is to increase awareness on the importance of a family court system that prioritizes child safety and acts in the best interests of children. And whereas the Family Court Awareness Month committee increases awareness on the importance of education and training on domestic violence, childhood trauma and post separation abuse for all professionals working within the family court system. And whereas the Family Court Awareness Month committee educates judges and other family court professionals on the empirical data and research that is currently available. Such research is a critical component to making decisions that are truly in the best interests of children. And whereas currently many families are struggling in silence and facing the reality that child safety is not being prioritized. And whereas Family Court Awareness Month provides an excellent opportunity for our system to demonstrate its support in recognizing the importance of a family court system that prioritizes child safety and acts in the best interests of children. Now therefore, I, Donna Myers, Mayor of the City of Santa Cruz, do hereby proclaim the month of November 2021 as Family Court Awareness Month. And the City of Santa Cruz encouraged all residents to join me in recognizing and commanding its observance and to find their own ways to give back to their communities. And just one quick comment, you know, I was approached by Tina with this request and, you know, this is the first time we've done the proclamation here in the City of Santa Cruz and I think sometimes we lose track of the young ones, you know, that we have to be thinking about in the future. So, Tina, I'm really happy that you're able to join us today and I'm very, very happy to give the, to declare the month of November for this effort. And I'm happy to have you say a few words if you'd like or let us know a little more about your work if you'd like just for the community that may be listening in. Absolutely. Thank you very much Mayor Myers and Council, Council persons. My name is Tina Swibbin. I am the founder of an organization called One Mom's Battle and also the creator of Family Court Awareness Month. To date, we have almost 200 cities, counties and even states who have proclaimed the month of November as Family Court Awareness Month and we're only in our second year. So, we've made a lot of progress in a short period of time. 12 years ago, I entered the Family Court system, forced to represent myself and had two very little girls. And I was naively believing that child safety was a priority and unfortunately that's not what's happening in our court system. When someone leaves a domestic violence situation, which we know is about power and control, that need for power and control doesn't just vanish. It actually transfers into post-separation abuse and the platform becomes the Family Court system. So we really need to shine a spotlight on the empirical research and data that is currently available and not being utilized. Many times our children's lives are truly dependent on a court system that is educated on domestic violence and trauma. So I'm absolutely grateful to the City of Santa Cruz for joining us in our awareness campaign and I'm grateful to be here today. Thank you so much Tina for being here and for your work on this very, very important effort and we're proud to be one of your newest cities in this effort. So thanks for joining us today. Thank you very much. Okay. Okay, next up, I will make a few announcements and then we will move on to our regular meeting. Today's meeting is being broadcast live on Community Television Channel 25 and streaming on the city's website, CityofSantaCruise.com. If you wish to comment on an agenda item today, instructions are provided on your screen. We will provide these instructions throughout the meeting whenever we move into an agenda item that will be opened up for public comment. Please note, public comment is heard only on items council is taking action on and not regular updates and reports. The items that will be open for public comment during today's meetings are numbers 13 through 25 on our agenda. On that move on to statements of disqualification. I'd like to ask the council members if there are any statements of disqualification today. Not seeing any hands. Okay, great. We'll move on to additions and deletions. I'd like to ask the city clerk to announce any additions or deletions to our agenda today. There are none. Thank you, Bonnie. We'll move on to oral communications announcement or I'm going to just explain that oral communications is an opportunity for members of the community to speak to us on items that are not on the agenda today. Oral communications will occur immediately after agenda item number 24. If you wish to make a comment during oral communications, please call in towards the end of item number 24 today. I'll ask our city attorney. I think it's Cassie Bronson today to provide a report on our closed session, please. Hey, a quick report today. The city council met in closed session with the HR director to discuss updated status of city manager recruitment efforts. The city council met in closed session with its labor negotiators to get an update as to the city's upcoming labor negotiations process. The city council also met in closed session with this legal council to discuss the claim of Caroline Murphy. In addition to one item of potential initiation of litigation, one item of significant exposure to litigation and the existing case, don't morph the war versus the city of Santa Cruz. And the city council continued its city manager closed session discussion until the end of open session today. And there was no other reportable action. Thank you, Cassie. Next up, we have our city manager report. The city manager will report and provide updates on the city's business COVID-19, the CZU lightning complex fire items and other events. Welcome, Rosemary. Great. Good afternoon, council members, mayor. I'm going to ask Ken Morgan and Laura Schmidt to give you a brief on the hybrid meetings that they've been working on. We talked about this at the last meeting that you would get a sort of a fuller report out both on the technology aspects as well as the procedural aspects that we've been working on. And then I will come back and just give you a very quick report about conditions from last weekend's storm event. Good afternoon, Mayor Myers, Vice Mayor Brunner and city council and Ken Morgan, IT director. Since our last council meeting on the 12th, not a whole lot has changed with respect to our IT configuration and chambers and our ability to facilitate hybrid meeting format. IT does anticipate this will be somewhat of a work in progress from a technology perspective, but we're pretty confident at this point that we've done adequate testing and can be prepared to support the format if and when council makes a final determination. I'll just share my screen again real quick as a reminder of what the configuration looks like. We've had a few council members visit the chambers this last week. A few more will be stopping by tomorrow to kind of put their eyes and hands on the format. But as a reminder, because of the need to capture individuals in a Zoom session, each council member will be utilizing a city-issued laptop and a city-issued web camera. We're going to be requiring this just from a support perspective. The consistency makes it easier for the IT department. I'll give you another shot of what the laptop kind of looks like. Still to be determined in the configuration is how we're going to facilitate closed session in the past. The practice has been that council would leave the chambers and proceed to a conference room that is potentially an option, or we may have council members adjourn to their offices at City Hall. But from an IT perspective, I do believe that we're prepared to support the hybrid format. I'll pass it over to Laura, our assistant city manager, to discuss some of the council logistics for non-IT related items. Thank you, Ken. And I would just like to acknowledge Ken and our clerk, Bonnie Bush. They've done a lot of research and outreach to other agencies as well as even sound professionals related to putting this setup in place. On the non-technical hybrid considerations regarding COVID-related items, so the city council entrances, the chamber entrances have been outbidded with temperature check stations, so those are available for use. We also have begun consideration of masks and we've had the city attorney's office opine as far as should the council want to mask can be a requirement for entry into the chambers, as well as proof of vaccination. As far as the chamber itself, right now the capacity in our pews because we have a little, we're a little bit more constrained in our chambers because we have those long benches rather than individual seats that we can jigger around. Right now at about three feet of social distancing, we have about a capacity of 28 members for the public. So that does not include the council members, the city attorney and the city manager, the clerk and the deputy clerk. Those are excluded from those numbers. And those numbers will change a little bit depending upon if we have people who come and they're with each other and they sit next to each other. 28 is just the anticipated number with three feet in between each individual person. And we would also be able to have a line of, we're figuring out the length of the wall for public comments and all communications of in-person folks and waiting to get up to the podium to be able to speak. So we're considering that as well. As far as staff support for going hybrid, we are working with the fire department related to potentially having the fire marshal as needed for capacity issues because our capacity is significantly diminished with three feet of distancing that before, what it was before without the distancing. We will also have more than one sergeant in arms for the police department. And we are also in the process of researching how to hire external contracting help for what will work for us to be able to help great people at the door, offer them a mask, should they not have one, figure out on ongoing clicking capacity for the numbers in the chambers, that sort of thing. So all of that is in process right now. And we're visually trying to get all that in place per council direction. And I think the date on the table was the second meeting in November at this point was what we were targeting. And with that, I'll turn that over back to city manager Rose Merrimanard. And I don't know if you had any other summary comments before we handed it over to council. I don't, but you can see that we've got some good progress made. And if you haven't had a chance as council members to visit the chambers and sort of do a trial run, we definitely encourage that. I know that many of you have had that opportunity and others of you are scheduled. So Mayor Myers, you might want to take questions and then I'll come back and close up. Absolutely. Council members questions. I see council member Boulder. I was wondering if there's any plans to broadcast maybe out to the courtyard or I know people have suggested the civic or other locations where like the broader community could gather. Thank you council member Golder that as Rosemary was speaking, I just realized I had forgotten to add that piece of to my update. So yes, we have capability to broadcast outside of the council chamber there. There's a TV along the wall there and that will be working. We're also exploring reservations and figuring out if there's overlap where we could have overflow over into the Tony Hill room at the civic to be able to have some seating there so that people can go from there to watch and then come over to the chamber to speak in person if they want to. The host that I was referring to that we're figuring out how to hire would have to staff over there at the Tony Hill room as well because with the reduced function of the civic auditorium and the off hours of this. We don't have the employees having to be able to put that in place given the parks and rec situation right now. Thank you council member Cummings. Thank you mayor I just want to circle back to something I brought up before, and maybe this is for legal counsel but I'm just kind of wondering if it would be, and this is, I guess, you know something we might have to talk to talk about it. I don't know what the agenda is but whether we want to, or if we're able to have any kind of regulations around those who may, you know, want to come in the chamber and disrupt our meeting by, you know, taking off their masks and being disruptive in that manner. We already have some rules around disruption meetings and whether it can fall into that or whether it will be good for us to put something else that's a little bit more stringent in place just given the level of impact that COVID-19 could have on members of the community who might want to attend meetings. That's a good question. I know there is something already on the books with respect to disruption of public business in the penal code, but we can certainly look into that and report back to see if, you know, a municipal code approach might be appropriate for something like that. Thank you. So, any other questions? I think you might have said this but maybe we can repeat it one more time. Our target date for potentially the next in person is the second meeting in November. Is that correct, Roseberry? November 23rd. November 23rd. So that would be the day we would come back into the chambers and from there on out we would be in the, whatever they call it, the jewel hybrid. Hybrid. Hybrid. I knew it was something having to do with the hybrid situation and moving forward. Any other questions from Council? Okay. Thanks, Laura. And thank you. And thank you also to the whole team for all your work, so tons of work and it'll be a very interesting transition back into there. So thank you so much. And thank you for making that happen for our community also. Okay. And then just a very brief update on the storm event. We did obviously have a atmospheric river situation coming in on Sunday. There was quite a bit of prep work going on in the city and in the county in the days heading into the weekend. And we did coordinate with the county both on Saturday and the Sunday as a sort of staff team. Kind of did some research on particularly on Sunday morning kind of checking out what was going on and the kind of impacts that were being experienced a little bit further north and Sonoma County in Napa where they were clearly getting, you know, a much more significant than storm event that we were anticipating and kind of tuned our response strategy a little bit to that. And then we did have the river come up obviously we didn't have flooding, local flooding, and pretty much came through without, you know, kind of unscathed. There was trees down some other kinds of things like that. The county was quite worried about debris flow up in the San Lorenzo Valley and in Boulder Creek and in the Swanton area, and Ben Lohman and really didn't have anything significant going on. So there was lots of interest and I think it was a it was a good dry run for a potential, you know, additional kind of those kinds of storm events. And we will just see was obviously many of us who watched the water situation we're quite pleased with the welcome rain. That's it. Thank you Rosemary. And does that conclude your report for today. Okay, great. Thank you so much. We'll move now to item number 11, which is our city council meeting calendar. And I will ask the city clerk to provide any updates to the calendar. We have no update. And Bonnie we do have a special we have a study session I believe is it scheduled for November 30 right and that will be on on housing policy new housing legislation correct. I believe that's on the calendar though. I think that's a little bit of a revision I think we want to go to delay the new legislation on housing into sometime probably after the first of the year. We'd like to use that study session with you to focus on presentation to you about the Rena numbers regional housing needs assessment numbers and the methodology that that's been being used and so you'll get an update on that. But more importantly, we want to talk with you about the objective standards that are coming forward the the planning department has taking the original or the initial work of that to the planning commission next week. And we would that we obviously come conversations there but we'd really like to get the council's input on this in the sort of earlier stages rather than having it come back to you in some much more fully baked form. So the plan would be to use that that November 30 study session for the Rena numbers and then initial conversation with council on objective standards. Thank you Rosemary I'm glad you corrected that I know we have been back, excuse me bouncing back and forth so yeah and Rena just for the public is the regional housing needs allocation numbers those are calculated every eight years by the state of California through the administration of Monterey Bay Area governments. That that acronym has been in our community a lot over the last few months so if you really want to understand what the expectation for the state of California is in terms of providing housing. That might be a session you want to join so that it's going to be at four o'clock on November 30. I will now provide the opportunity for council members to report out on actions at external boards committees and joint powers authorities meetings. And so this is a chance for our community to hear from council members who serve on these various boards committees and joint powers authorities and the types of activities and decisions coming from those activities. So I will go ahead and just make my way around the zoom field here. I'll start with council member commentary Johnson. Thank you, Mayor. I can give an update on the metro board and Mayor Myers you can jump in where I might have missed something. So just first around COVID and vaccines that agency wide vaccination rate is at 85%, which is really great to hear. They currently the vaccine. Policy is that you that we if you are not vaccinated and cannot provide proof of vaccination as an employee of the metro. Then there's a mandatory testing that happens once a week. It'll increase actually starting yesterday increased it twice a week. The metro is moving towards a mandatory vaccine requirement by the end of the year so they are communicating with employees actively about that. The metro is recruiting bus operators, they have three applicants right now, and they are working really hard to to recruit the bus operators were down right now. And important to note is that bus operators do get paid as they are trained to become bus operators. We had legislative updates from federal and state lobbyists there was so much there. So I won't, I won't repeat it all and most people probably know a lot of it but just to say that we're still waiting for the bipartisan infrastructure bill one, which is a $1.2 trillion bill with $5 billion for the bus operators dedicated for low and no emission grant programs. Congressman Panetta has proposed a tax credits for zero mission buses. And it also includes five year reauthorization for transit programs. There was a lot more there but that's just the very quick summary. And there was a lot there at the state as well but one piece I'd like to highlight is 1.1 billion for the clean California program, which includes 300 million for local governments. I think I'll pause there with the Metro Board and Mayor Myers you can jump in with other pieces I may have missed. I think you covered everything on that. Yeah, thank you. I maybe I'll just let my other colleagues talk about the community programs committee and and then maybe Sonya with a racial equity work. Like I just talked a lot. Okay. Thank you council member all go ahead and recognize council member Watkins. Sorry I had to close the door for my dog. Sure, I'm happy to report on the community program sort of picking up where you left off. Council member Calentari Johnson will before our full council will having an item related to core and the next steps with core in regards to our partnership with the county. We met yesterday to really look at the approach possible funding allocations and levels and other considerations but I really want to express our appreciation for the work on behalf of the staff and the county to really create a process that I think is really reflected a lot of the input lessons learned and have refined kind of an approach that I think will really work to support our nonprofit community. So that will be forthcoming. The other report I'd have is the CJC ad hoc committee met we discussed our annual report that will be coming out looking at some different data points in regards to public safety regional public safety analysis and we look forward to looking at some of the data points that you all after it's been approved by the entire criminal justice council body and lastly I think just on behalf of the farmers market board in which I sit as a representative on as a city representative. So looking at one securing their location in live oak and working with sort of the new landlords there but also really taking a position that they're really committed to working that we're really committed to working with the city to ensure that we have a permanent location in the city as the kind of the conversation comes around the campaign that's been forthcoming in regards to where they are. We ultimately want to work with the city to find a permanent location and so that is that is the position they're taking a word taking as a board. And then I think we haven't met for public safety recently so I don't think I have anything else to report on that. And then in regards to in regards to visit Santa Cruz County we're you know as we mentioned with Maggie so fantastic really to fill her shoes but we're in the process of creating a really thoughtful recruitment to get the right person in that position and more to come on that in the future but I think that covers my committees. Great. Thank you Council Member Vice Mayor Brunner. Thank you Mayor Myers and visit Santa Cruz. I don't have much to add besides what Council Member Watkins there is a current recruitment process to replace Maggie Ivy as the director for that. She has agreed to stay past her initial date so we appreciate that. Let's see the racial equity work is not outside or external meeting but we have been meeting with the AAPI members of the AAPI group and other community members in Latinx and the black community. Working on racial equity resolution and some defined actionable steps for the city moving forward. And I think what I will just say is that we're really excited to bring that forward and have really given a lot of thought and process to to some of that work. So in terms of also working with staff and most recently health and all policies and having many eyes and input on it. So that's been a huge amount of work and I will pass on the two by two meeting to you Mayor Myers. Thank you Vice Mayor. Council Member Brown. Thank you Mayor. I'll start my report with the area agency on aging. I serve as the city of Santa Cruz rep. It is a body that includes elected officials from across the jurisdictions and the county for those who aren't as familiar. There were some really great news was reported at our last meeting related to the way that the AAA is funded and will be then distributing funding to the community programs that provide critical services to seniors through senior network services and some of the other programs. A couple of things that we we talked about that were and I just got some information that I thought would be really and it was it was really just hit me thinking about what the experience of some of these providers was during the pandemic and I everybody was experiencing you know kind of this how to deal in crisis with under resources. Organizations and a lot of need. And so senior senior legal services for example experienced a 925% increase in demand. The number of meals that were distributed and delivered while the congregate meal programs were shut down and those are beginning to come back online. So in Santa Cruz and Watsonville we are still searching for a large number of meals that were distributed and delivered while the congregate meal programs were shut down and those are beginning to come back online. And so in Santa Cruz and Watsonville we are still searching for a location in live oak to provide those services with the live oak senior center which is on school district property being out of the mix at the moment. So another shout out if folks have any ideas and facilities in the live oak area that are close to transit that might be able to meet that need. Please share. In term I have a lot to report on the regional transportation commission so I'll try to be brief. I so I as the chair of the RTC participated in our first federal advocacy lobby day. And it was an opportunity to meet with Congress members Panetta and Carvajal. They showed up and met with us and we're engaged on one of the busiest days of the year they were trying to get the first funding package through Congress on that very day but they stopped in and we talked. Staff from Senator Padilla Senator Feinstein and representative issues offices also showed up US Department of Transportation and White House staff as well. And they were all really you know as an opportunity to get to meet them this is a coalition of transportation agencies on the central coast so from Santa Barbara to Santa Cruz and we were all represented there and talked about particular issues but then also regional issues and they were very knowledgeable and very supportive and it looks like they're you know good things may be coming depending on how the political process plays out in Washington. Our goal was really and my goal was to highlight the transportation needs and priorities around the Monterey Bay Sanctuary scenic trail the rail trail project. And active transportation infrastructure and some of the other areas in which the city of Santa Cruz has really been a leader and and they were appreciative of that receptive to that and I think there's you know the relationships that we're developing will serve us well moving forward. I also was able and I think others were as well I know at least a few other council members were able to take a ride on the demonstration Coast Futura. A train that was operating in Watsonville and then in Santa Cruz in North County over the past week and a half or so. And I think you know as a demonstration and I knew all have heard probably various things about it's been in the news so I won't describe it. You can learn all about it in the in the news and social media lots of cool pictures and descriptions of people's experiences but I think it was really cool to just have you know an opportunity to talk about what kind of a non traditional or less traditional is historically light rail. Electric passenger rail could look like on our rail corridor which we in the public now owns. So you know it just really you know a lot of information about how it works and seeing in action and opportunities for moving this discussion forward. So more to come on that and I think that I will leave it there community programs got was covered and yeah I'll leave it there and pass it off to whoever's next thank you. We'll have councilmember Cummings go next thanks councilmember Brown. All right thank you have a couple of the committees and commissions that serve on to present out on the first thing our climate action task force we met on September 29. We received the group received updates on some of the city projects that were underway. So one of those for example was the RP that was out on the Santa Cruz County wide bike share program October is bike month and the city is launching downtown ebike 0% interest slash $200 dollar rebate program. I won't go through all these because I think these are things that the councils are aware of and these were updates to the task force in particular. As far as climate action plan 2030 of a goal setting survey was sent out to the community. And that was out until October 13. They were down in the beach flats handing out $5 credits to people who took the survey over the course of that time. They're utilizing a platform called considerate though enable robust and transparent feedback on the climate action plan development. And this will be going on over the course of the next three to four months. Our education platform is launched and at that time one of the things that was moving forward was an eight week educational campaign to promote the eight topics of most interest to our community. And so I would encourage people to check out that platform and I'm not sure if it's on the city's website currently but I would encourage folks to follow up with Tiffany Weiswester to email the city and we can get that platform to folks. The other which was actually a really exciting meeting was our laugh co meeting. One of the items that came before us was a sphere of view of all 13 fire districts in Santa Cruz County. And this report looked at service provisions financial stability of the different districts and provided recommendations on you know whether there should be consolidation of one another. I think overall one of the things that came out of that presentation was that across the county overwhelmingly we're meeting the state standards. But I'd say that the majority of the fire districts throughout the county are not meeting the national standards. What I'm saying by that is that the standards that they were looking at were firefighters on duty so the state standards that there's two firefighters on duty at all times the national standards there's a minimum force for firefighters on duty at all time. And while we're meeting those state standards around having a minimum of two firefighters on duty at all time where districts throughout the county are not always meeting that national standard of four firefighters on duty at all time. I'll just rather than go through every single district which I think you know this was a really robust report that was done it's over 300 pages long on all the different districts I really encourage folks in the community who are interested in the fire districts to check out the report. In terms of Santa Cruz. I'll just highlight a few points that were brought up. One of the highlights was that ISO rating which is how well a fire department district is able to perform in terms of putting firefighters out as a skill one to 10 with one being the highest rating 10 being the lowest rate to. So that's really good to know that in terms of our ability to put out fires we're among the best. We're meeting our state standards in terms of firefighters on duty but we're not meeting our national standards. We have a sphere that's expanding beyond its service area. So meaning that we're going out to a lot of fires that are not within our boundaries but you know providing that mutual aid is essential for helping our neighbors. And we do have some financial constraints that were as of June 30 2020 the city is operating with a net position of approximately 54 million. And this is actually but we've been ending with an annual deficit over the last six years. And so that is a bit of a concern that we hopefully can address and there has been some rumblings about, you know, countywide consolidation. The ongoing question and something that we're going to have if we want to move in that direction there's going to be a there's going to have to be a larger countywide discussion about that. But but this report was really important to help inform the community, especially after the fires that we had last year on how well our fire departments are able to perform and how our how financially stable our fire districts are currently. So I would encourage all members of the community and members of the council to check out that report in particular because I think it's really informative and can really help us as we're thinking about fighting fires and climate change moving forward. And that is. That's all I have to present for the day. Thank you. Okay, thank you council member council member golder. I don't believe I have anything to add that hasn't already been said. Thank you. I'll just report out on a couple of items. The homeless two by two committee met earlier this month. We meet every other Wednesday of the month. And we do have a meeting coming up with senator layered and assembly member stone this week to begin discussions on how the city and county can work together on the $14 million that the state did award the city for efforts around homelessness over the next year. That meeting will be convened by senator layered and assembly member stone. And we will be talking about the partnership from the county departments as well as the CAO and of course our city manager Rosemary Menard along with myself and vice mayor Brunner will be attending that meeting. And this will be a sort of our kickoff on how what our priorities are and talking a little bit about how the other two agencies work together. And we will be talking a little bit about how the county can work together on that. And we will be talking a little bit about information about the efforts that the county is taking in an effort called project re home, which is finding solutions and homes for people who have been using the COVID-19 related shelters. And they are starting to get some good results with finding folks places either to find new homes for folks or at least at minimum transitional housing and other options. So there's been good success as we have to as we're winding down some of those shelters and hotels that were used during COVID. In getting people into permanent in either transitional housing or shelter or continuing to provide service to them. And we probably anticipate some kind of report out to the council I would imagine on our meeting with the senator and the assembly member probably next month's city council meeting. I also attended the we will be oh excuse me we will be having reconvening an ad hoc revenue committee. Upcoming this this coming at the end of the calendar year and going into next fiscal years planning that committee will be convening in November. Let me see I'm just looking through my list here. I think everyone else has covered my some of my boards that I've been on I think I'll go ahead and stop there in the interest of time. And thank you thank you to all the council members for your reports today. Community should know that your council members don't just do this job but they actually participate heavily on other boards and commissions and that helps the city become involved in some of those solutions that were described today. So thank you council members for your time on those committees and external boards and commissions. Next up we'll go ahead and move into our consent agenda today. And these will be items 13 through 21 on your agenda today for on our agenda for members of the public who are streaming this meeting now is the time to call in if you want to comment on items 13 through 21 instructions will be on the screen. Remember remember to mute your streaming device press star nine to raise your hand and listen for the queues and you have been unmuted. All items will be acted upon in one motion unless an item is pulled by a council member for further discussion. So I will look to see if council members just get caught up on my agenda here. Have any items that would initially why don't I see if anyone would like to pull an item to either make a comment on or have a question on. I'm going to make a comment on item number 15 which is the Caltrans sustainable transportation planning grant application active transportation plan update so I just have a brief comment on that. Okay next is there are there any items are there any council members who wish to pull an item today off of our consent agenda. Okay, we don't have any pulled items. And so I'll go ahead and let me see here I'm just getting myself caught up. Okay, I'm going to go ahead and just make a quick comment on item number 15 and this is mostly just to recognize and make sure our community understands sort of what this item is. I'm going to take some discussions with members of our community around the update of our active transportation plan and this is exactly that. This will be our staff applying for a Caltrans sustainable transportation planning grant application. And from what I understand this will go in and this could basically initiate the active active transportation plan update. Recently I met with some public members who members of our community who were interested in seeing some action on an update on the plan with regards to how basically sort of along the lines of additional safe, safe routes within our community and specifically looking at some of the models that places like Portland have used where you've sort of marked out a path that sort of is more neighborhood oriented but maybe it's you know the place that your that path is what you're using to get to work or school or what and this update of this plan as far as I understand from our staff can look at those kinds of things and especially in the context of sort of neighborhood greenways and things like that would show up in our current active transportation plan. So I just wanted to make sure that members of the public were aware that our staff as usually is on top of things and are already pursuing the ability to make some of these improvements. Excuse me to initiate some of these discussions with our community so and I don't know if Claire is on the line today. If she has any further comments or a clarification she can provide on this item for the public. I think we're going to go ahead and say clear globally transportation planner. The one thing I have to add is that we're super hopeful that we get this grant it will be submitted tomorrow. We'll find out in if we got it and the work can begin in November of 2022. Similar to the last time that we did our active transportation plan in 2017. We would have a robust community based process to set up the program of projects going forward with this plan. One thing substantially different with this plan then with our 2017 plan that we did is a significant emphasis on including more with more intention members of our disadvantaged communities and doing really intentional outreach and engagement to those communities with those with those communities and in particular using our existing community partnerships in those communities so that we do have a more trusted relationship there. We are really really hopeful that we get this grant and looking forward to being able to implement this process and if anyone does have any questions I'm available. Thank you. Claire is there any questions on this item at all. Good luck. Thank you again for always being so proactive and getting this work underway, just as we're all sort of realizing you know that we want more we always want more. So thank you Claire and thanks to your department for your help with this. Okay, I'll go ahead and take the consent agenda out to our public now to see if there's any interest in commenting on our public, excuse me, our consent agenda. My cold is getting into my head now. I would request that if you would like to speak on any of the items on our consent agenda. Now is the time to do so please press star nine on your phone to raise your hand. When it is your time to speak you will hear an announcement that you have been unmuted. And then we'll set the timer for two minutes. I'm looking into the looking out at our attendees today and I am not seeing any hands raised on the consent. I would like to take it back to Council and Council Member Brown. I would move the consent agenda. Great. And motion by Council Member Brown and I'll see Council Member Watkins has her hand up. I'll go ahead and second that motion. Okay. I have a motion from Council Member Brown seconded by Council Member Watkins to approve the consent agenda in its entirety. And could I have a roll call vote please Bonnie. Council Member Watkins. Hey. I'm sorry, Johnson. Okay. That's a motion passed unanimously. Thanks Bonnie. We'll go ahead and move into our public hearing now. And this is going to be agenda item number 2020, excuse me, agenda item number 22, which is the second reading and final adoption ordinance number 2021-18 amending Santa Cruz Municipal Code provisions referring to previously repealed sections in the reading and final adoption ordinance number 2021-18 amending Santa Cruz municipal code provisions referring to previously repealed sections in title one. For members of the public who are streaming this meeting, if this is an item you want to comment on, now is the time to call in using the instructions on your screen. Are there any questions or comments from council on this item? I am seeing no raised hands. And now I'll go ahead and look out to our attendees today, our public attendees. If you are interested in comment on the second reading and final adoption of ordinance number 2021-18, amending the Santa Cruz municipal code provisions referring to previously repealed sections in title one. Please press star nine on your phone to raise your hand. When it is your time to speak, you will hear an announcement that you have been unmuted. The timer will then be 72 minutes. Is there anyone in our attendees today that wishes to comment on this item? I have not seen any hands. I'll now turn it back to council and look for a motion on this item. Council member Watkins. I'll move the recommendation. Okay, and council member Golder. I'm happy to second that. And we have a motion by council member Watkins, seconded by council member Golder to approve item number 22. Which is the final adoption of ordinance number 2021-18. And we have a roll call vote, please. Lonnie. Council member Watkins. Aye. Council member Johnson. Is Brown on? Yeah, I remember she let us know, mayor, that she had to leave. Oh, right. For a little bit. Yeah. 215, she'll be back. Member Cummings. Vice mayor Brunner. Mayor Myers. Aye. That motion passes unanimously. We'll now move on to our general business item today, which is item number 23. We have two items under general business today. This is a report on re-envision Santa Cruz, our interim recovery plan update. For members of the public who are streaming this meeting, if this is an item you want to comment on, now is the time to call in using the instructions on your screen. The order will be a presentation of the item by staff, followed by questions from the council. We will then take public comment and then return to the council for deliberation and action. And I have our assistant city manager, Laura Schmidt here today, and she will go ahead and give the presentation. Welcome, Laura. Thank you, mayor. Like you share my screen. You're able to see that now? Yes, we can. Thank you. I'm just resizing you guys, so I can actually see you as I speak as well. Thank you, council. We're here today with our third update on re-envision Santa Cruz. It's our 12 to 18 month recovery plan. And its end date will take us through the remainder of this current fiscal year. Today we'll highlight accomplishments, give you an update on the metrics, as well as an update on the team's progress with equity. And just as a heads up, I looked briefly at the participants, and I believe Dr. Tiffany Wise-West is under the weather, so she might not be here for questions, but should you have questions? In the third section, I will note them down and ask Tiffany offline and get back to you. Just a recalibration, our focus areas are fiscal sustainability, downtown and business revitalization and infrastructure. For the summary of accomplishments for this reporting period, that takes us through September 30th of this year. You can see attachment one in on base with a full report, but I'll just do a little smattering of highlights. As far as fiscal sustainability, we have taken more transactions online for building and planning permits, and that allows the public to conduct business with us at their leisure. By making a trip into the city hall, they don't want to spend the time doing that, and it also allows our staff to do that more efficiently as those come in at any time and are able to process them more quickly. We did a completion of a grant funded cannabis equity assessment. You just saw that recently at council from economic development and our consultants, I believe from Humboldt State before they were from. We also are coordinating a draft with the county for a legal cannabis activity enforcement, and that'll come over to you in the winter of this year. And then we also received the grant award for more vegetation management. On the downtown and business revitalization highlights, we have the downtown expansion plan prep. There's a community meeting coming up shortly this fall, and then you guys adopted the temporary outdoor dining program recently to get us through this winter, and then the permanent outdoor dining plan will be coming forward to you shortly. The objective standards, the first draft of those are completed or they're gonna be done in the fall. And then for the library mixed youth, they brought on board the affordable housing developer, as well as the master architect. And then for Pacific Station North and South, also fits into the fiscal sustainability front. They've been beating the bushes for more funding and applying and grant submission. So that will help us on the fiscal sustainability side of things. On the infrastructure front, the training program for city and county physicians has been put together. So that's a nice cooperative deal that we're doing with the county. And then progress to prepare our local coastal amendment is going to you in the wintertime and then to the coastal commission in 2022. We are doing a lot of work toward the preparation of the San Lorenzo River Flood Management Demand certification. And they completed vegetation management to reduce the virus off the lower Emma, a prairie trail. And then the grant management that you saw over in fiscal sustainability will help us do more expansive vegetation management in other parts of the city. And then another great achievement on the infrastructure side. If you all remember, you adopted waters long range financial plan as well as a proposed rate structure and there'll be a hearing upcoming on that. On the metrics front, in the summary, the full report is in attachment to in your packet. On the good news side, the side, the utility terminations are 10% less than the previous quarters year to date total. And on the minus side, business licensing issue is about 11% down from the previous quarter. Nutrally, the downtown retail commercial vacancy is flat right now. And then on the revenue side, the good news is that transient occupancy tax is about 7% of an improvement from the previous quarters year to date. And then fail tax and add taxes also has strong increases. Kind of in summary, I think just as there are ups and downs in our personal lives as it relates to the pandemic and in our community, I think this reflects that as well. The business licenses are down but the consumer indications for the transient occupancy tax or the admission taxes are up. So we've got a little bit of a mixed agatrix going on in our community. And I think that parallels strongly with the course of the pandemic. This is something new that as I was putting and looking at the data, I decided to put together and see how it goes. So the change that we track is as of that quarter year to date in 2021 compared to 2019, which is our last standard year. We didn't compare to fiscal year 2020 because that was the year of the pandemic and the shutdown. So we're trying to compare 2021 and those months moving forward to what it was like in 2019. So on the business licensing issue, the blue bar is the change between Q1 and Q2. The first report that we did compared to Q3. And then the orange bar is the change between Q3 and this last report period of Q4. So on the business licensing issued, the change is a further decline. So that's not good news. But that average downtown retail commercial vacancy rate, it's very tiny. So that reduction compared to 2019 is good news. So it gives you a little bit of flavor of how we're doing from last quarter's comparisons to this quarter's comparison. So our utility, our business closures on the self-reported side is in improvement and the utility terminations, which we think is more accurate is also an improvement. So that kind of supports the previous metric as well. This one, the self-reported is purely reliant upon the businesses and reporting to us whereas the utility terminations were actually looking at the utility usage of the businesses. The number of permits issued on the planning application side. The change here is it was down and it's up here. And the number of permits issued on the building permit side is it's a little bit of a negative, but the permits issued, that one is kind of not good news, but because of the increase in the construction costs, the valuation of those building permits that were issued are up by 46%. So there's a huge uptick on the valuation side of it. This one, I just spun off the transient occupancy numbers. So the relative increases from the previous two quarter comparison to the latest quarter comparison, we're doing much better. Same thing with sales tax revenue. You can see a market increase there. And you can see ad tax at one point. I'm trying to remember what time period it was for, but it was something like 96% down. You can see with the reopening of California, these numbers are finally in. And you can see the giant uptick that we got for admissions tax. On the health and all policies, the group has met and further, like a deeper dive into various metrics that we're reporting. So their target date to be able to include in reports to you is in the Q4 of this current fiscal year. So it's going to take a while for us to begin to get this data out of what we're currently gathering and add this data gathering piece of it so that we can then report it to you. So overall, you'll see a lot of detail in the agenda report, but the target date is fiscal year Q4, fiscal year 2022 for you. And then we'll be able to bring you more of an equity plan for business licensing, vacancies, closures, possibly parks and rec open space maintenance hours that's still to be determined, recreation facilities maintenance hours and a qualitative reporting regarding the partnership agreements that we have with community-based organizations and other frontline underrepresented groups. There's also in the report, opportunity zones, two new ones and city-wide comparison of vacancy and average lease rates that the team is proposing that we present to you as an ongoing equity lens metric to report. That is the summary. The recommendation before you is to accept our most recent poorly progress report on re-envisioned Santa Cruz and provide feedback as desired. And with that, I will turn it back over to you, Mayor. Excuse me, thank you very much, Laura. Are there questions for Laura or, and Laura, I got a text that Tiffany apparently is also online. Are there any questions from city council or comments from council at this time? Council member Cummings. I just wanted to thank staff on that update. And yes, it's refreshing and good news to hear that in some of our tax revenue areas that we're actually improving sales tax, user and tax DOT, those are all looking a lot better than we were last year. So that's encouraging. I'm just wondering with regards to the vacancy rate in the downtown and maybe Bonnie can speak to this. I'm just kind of wondering if there's any opportunities. I know we had been discussing having these downtown pop-up business programs. And so I'm just wondering if we could hear a little bit about how that might be going. And if there's any ways that we can help kind of improve, kind of decrease in that vacancy rate through opportunities. Hi, council member Cummings and other members of council. Bonnie Lipscomb with Economic Development. And we are looking and working. We do have one downtown pops in that we have a lease signed. We have a second one we just received back this week. So we are actually working with retailers to see if we can get that in particularly for the holiday season. We are also working with the card program and just to get some of those vacant storefronts filled, we are having some challenges overall with the recovering economy on some of the sales tax in looking at sort of caps on lease rates in the downtown through our program. So we are trying to be flexible and looking at that as that goes forward. We also have a few projects in the downtown, a few sites that are actually under development. So they're not ready to be leased. And that's impacting also some of the development, some of the major storefronts, including Palace, Starbucks, Pizza, they're all looking at potential changes. We have the Del Mar also about to enter into construction and some of those are being delayed by availability of contractors. So we do have some challenges as we're working in the downtown, but there's definitely interest to get those filled particularly before the holiday season. We have kicked off our holiday shopping efforts and so you will see a real push for supporting downtown businesses over the next season. And then one of the things that we're going to do for the next reporting period specifically is actually do a manual count of vacancies in the downtown because we can actually go down and look at that. And so we'll have more reliable data for you at the next quarter on what the actual downtown vacancies are. Okay, thank you very much. Those are all my questions. Thank you, Council Member, Council Member Contari Johnson. Thank you so much for all the incredible work in the really thorough report. It's really quite incredible to see the grid that you put together and all the work that's happening. So thank you, Laura, and thanks to everyone else who's doing the work. I wondered if you can share a little bit more about the grant writing project and where we're at with the assessment across our departments and opportunities. I definitely can. And I also don't know if Tony Elliott is on the line if you would like to chime in at some point. So we have a draft of the strategic plan from the consult team partner that we're working with right now and that is in final edits with the department head team. And one of the next steps that we want to do based upon the feedback that we received from them is do a pilot engagement with them for a grant application to be led out of the city manager's office under the leadership of Dr. Tiffany Wise West. Tiffany is one of our most advanced grant writing and talented writers in this space. So we think that she would be able to pick a project working with the other departments that crosses the departmental boundaries. So it'll be cross departmental and then she would be able to work with the consulting company to do proper evaluation and give us feedback as far as a pilot experience with them for next steps. So that's the current plan in place. Can I just ask one more follow up to that? When you say pilot, is it an actual grant proposal? Okay. Yeah, I'm just saying pilot because it's not like an all in process where we wanna do, this is the strategy and now we wanna do essentially a proof of concept. Let's work with you, let's go out, target a particular grant underneath the leadership of the city employee in partnership with you and see what we can do to win it. Great, thank you. You're welcome. And I saw Vice Mayor Bruner's hand was up previously. My question was answered, thank you. It was, okay, great. Thank you. Any other questions from council members on this? I'll just check in. Thank you, Laura and the whole team. Nice to see sort of these quarterly reality of where we're at instead of not really having anything to measure or maybe different folks tracking different things. But I think this gives us a great way for our community kind of to understand the kinds of things that we can track to see where our work areas need to be focused on and the opportunities that we can pursue for their prioritize. So I really appreciate the work that you guys have put into this. And it's nice to kind of see some things, maybe some of those bars being a little higher than we all initially thought they may be. So really appreciate it. And just the presentation with a lot of the graphical interfaces really nice to be able to just look through that and kind of get a sense of how things are going. So really appreciate it. I'm gonna go ahead and take this item out to the public now. So this will be items, item number 23, re-envision Santa Cruz, our interim recovery plan update. If you are interested in commenting on this item, please press star nine on your phone to raise your hand. When it is your time to speak, you will hear an announcement that you have been unmuted. The timer will then be set to two minutes. I'm gonna take a look at our attendees today to see if there's any hands in the air. I'm not seeing any folks with their hands raised at this time. So I'll go ahead and take this back to council for action. And again, this is to accept the city's most recent quarterly progress report on re-envision Santa Cruz at 12 to 18 month interim recovery plan. And I see Vice Mayor Bruner and then council member voluntary Johnson. Oh, you're muted. Vice mayor. Sorry about that. I moved to accept the quarterly progress report. The most recent quarterly progress reports on re-envision Santa Cruz. Thank you. And council member voluntary Johnson. I'll second. Okay. We have a motion to accept the city's quarterly progress report on the re-envision Santa Cruz. And that motion was by Vice Mayor Bruner and seconded by council member voluntary Johnson. And Bonnie, could we do a roll call vote? Council member Watkins. Aye. Council member Johnson. Aye. Vice Mayor Bruner. That motion passes unanimously. Okay. We're going to keep moving because we're making good time and we'll have a little bit of a break this afternoon. Next up is agenda item number 24. This is the amendment to Santa Cruz municipal code chapter 6.12 to apply with state mandated organic waste disposal requirements and adding section 3.08.26 to Santa Cruz municipal code to establish recycled and organic waste procurement policy to comply with Senate bill 1383. And the draft policy is for review. I have here in my notes that Bob Nelson will be, Bob Nelson and Mary Haley Owsley from our public works department, resource recovery will be doing presentation for us. And then for members of the public who are streaming this meeting, if this is an item you want to comment on, you should call in now using the instructions on your screen. We're going to hear from our staff first. We'll then have questions from the council and then we'll take public comment and then return to the council for deliberation and action. So I'll turn this over to Bob and Mary. Good afternoon council and Mayor Myers. SB 1383 is known as the short lived climate pollutants Organics Waste Reduction Act and it's probably the most far reaching act that CalRecycle has done in the last 30 years, I would say. So I'm going to go ahead and share my screen for a short presentation. So 1383 requires several things. What they're trying to do is reduce climate pollutants which are typically or primarily what they're focusing is organics that have been still being disposed in the landfill. So what they have been targeting is a 50% reduction in landfill organic waste by 2020 which they did not meet that goal at this point. The SB 1383 requirements are scheduled to take effect January 1st, 2022. In 2025, they expect to see a 75% reduction in landfill organic waste. And then 2025, they're looking to see a 20% increase in recovery of currently disposed edible food. So stuff that can actually be redistributed to people that are in need of edible food. So what the jurisdiction is responsible for at this point is to provide organics collection services to all residents and businesses. And so we already provide that for the most part. What we'll be adding is the second portion of that which is establishing food scrap collection in that. So both in commercial businesses and residential collection will be adding food scraps. We also are supposed to establish edible food recovery programs and work with those businesses that do that such as second harvest food bank. We are supposed to conduct education and outreach to the community about all these programs. And then there is also a procurement section of this where the idea is to what they call closing the loop. So you create a product and then you actually buy that product, create in a market for it. And then we also are supposed to assure that there is access to recycling and edible food recovery capacity that's working with those organizations that do recover food and connecting them with businesses that have that material available. And then a big portion of this is to monitor and the compliance and conduct enforcement which is a little bit different than, we typically try to do the compliance through education but this really has a huge focus on enforcement including fines for people that are non-compliant. So some of the key jurisdiction dates is essentially January 1st, 2022 which is where we should be providing organic's collection to all residents in building and businesses, establishing food recovery programs, conducting education and outreach, establishing their procurement policy and capacity planning for the future. One of the things that's a little different about this and why it seems like we're getting into this a little bit late is that we didn't really see the final language to this Senate bill until actually December of 2019. And then what we saw was as a course in by March, we were in a pandemic and essentially shut down. So Senator Laird had actually put a Senate bill forward to try and delay and what we were looking for is really just kind of to get a year-long delay in that 2022 date just to accommodate for what we were set back from the pandemic but that didn't actually pass as proposed. It was changed to look at actually when Calvary cycle starts finding jurisdictions. So anyway, starting January 1st, 2024 is when we're actually required to start taking action which is finding people that are non-compliant with the regulations. So some of the things we're doing right now with the city is we currently have a food scrap processing pilot program which we're turning commercial food scraps into a liquid mash at this equipment. You can see here it's, we've recently installed that this last year at the Demiolane facility and it creates a mash program product which can be fed into the city wastewater treatment plan and used to generate additional biomethrin offset energy costs. So we have about 30 customers that are using that program now. We're expanding that. As you may recall, we established a food waste or a food scrap rate in our rate structure which allows us to go out and start pushing people into that food scrap commercial program. We've also established a couple of different things for residential programs. We have established three locations where participants can drop off their food scraps. That's Truscany Park, City Hall, and the City Landfill. You can see out here to the right, this is what the material is looking like that we're getting. They're pretty popular. Inside of this you can see, well you can't really see but there's two 32 gallon carts. When we've started out, we had one cart filled up every week. Now we're actually getting both sides with both carts. Build up twice a week. So people are really taking advantage of this product even though they have to bring their material from home to these drop offs. So we've also started as just a very small residential food scrap collection pilot program in the Seabright area. There's about 270 people that are involved in this. We get about 50 to 70 people that participate and put out containers each week. What we're doing is we're really trying to get an idea of how many people participate and then also trying to size the right size container. We don't really wanna get something that's very large and gives people too much capacity that we found that when that happens, people tend to put other things in that don't really belong in there. And the six gallon container, which you see right here, actually seems to be a pretty good option. We're getting about seven pounds per customer with that. So there's also a procurement requirement in 1383. It requires that we procure, this is that closing the loop portion of it, where they wanna create an in market for material that's created from these programs. So there's a minimum requirement for each jurisdiction. And this is for every jurisdiction in California. So it's based on the population and you have a certain amount of tonnage of recycled or composted material that you need to procure. It also, and it could be different things, it could be either methane created from our, or I'm sorry, renewable gas created from biomass, biomass energy, like the wastewater treatment produces, composted material, mulch that can be used for city parks, that type of thing. And then there's also a recycled content with paper requirements that, that's something we already have in place. But there's a little bit addition to that because there are some specific requirements on testing of that mulch material, that's something that we'll come back in the next reading of the ordinance. It's a little bit thin on what you see in this current ordinance. So the jurisdiction is also required to maintain records and report to Calgary site. This is something that's actually a big change from what we've done in the past. There's, we've probably already tripled our reporting annual and quarterly reporting that we do to CalRecycle. These are the kind of things that we'll have to be recording and keeping records for. Organic waste collection services, what we're providing, tonnages. They like to see actually where material is going. So who the marketing person, the marketing company you send it to, where that material goes, how you're minimizing contamination of those materials, waivers, if you establish waivers, there are some waiver procedures that you can give if people have not enough space, not enough material. Those things all have to be documented for them to inspect. Your education and outreach material, how you're sending stuff out when you send it out, when you actually visit and monitor customers, when you're, we have to do a much, much more inlifting where we actually look inside the container and actually look at the material that's in there. What we have to establish and monitor contracts for both the edible food recovery people, the people that are getting, that have the material and those that are taking it, the procurement, and then also the commercial edible food suppliers. So there's a lot of record keeping requirements. We have actually just purchased and are starting to implement a computer program database that will do a lot of this stuff that was actually built to meet the requirements of the SB 1383. So the jurisdiction enforcement requirements, essentially anybody that generates two cubic yards of any type of waste that includes recycling, waste, or organics, those, that's the people that fall into this compliance category. So that's the people that we'll be looking at. We have a three container collection system. So what we will do is we verify service and inspect for contamination. So the jurisdiction requirements, the very first thing that we're required to do is to adopt a new ordinance, which has all of these enforcement mechanisms. That's what you have in front of you today. It establishes really what is acceptable, how you can dispose of it, who has to dispose of it, who has to comply, and it establishes this pretty specific fines and violations notification and our enforcement procedures that we do. So that's what you're seeing today. And then also in starting in 2022, January 1st, we start doing those annual compliance reviews, inspections, that all of that stuff starts as January 1st, essentially. And then 2024 is when the actual compliance where CalRecycle can start finding us if we are not in compliance. So this is something that's a little bit of a change in how they're doing business. What used to be their office of local assistance is now becoming their office of compliance. So they're taking a much stronger view to make sure that jurisdictions can help them meet that 75% compliance. And here's CalRecycle's oversight, and this begins in 2022, but really violations section doesn't really start until 2024. But since we're reporting annually, they'll be working with us and other jurisdictions to make sure that we're actually meeting the requirements of this ordinance at that point. So that is the presentation, a very quick overview of a pretty substantial Senate bill that we'll be looking at in the future. So with that, I'll turn it back over. Thank you so much, Bob. That was, it's quite a lot. I mean, it's really shifted from kind of the techniques and the strategies from before. Mary, do you have a presentation as well, or are you here for questions? Good afternoon, Mary Myers and city council members. Mary Haley-Ausley from our deputy city attorney. I'm here to answer any legal questions regarding the bill. I do want to make a quick clarification on the penalty and enforcement provisions for CalRecycle on this city. Those actually do start in 2022. CalRecycle does have discretion. If they see a jurisdiction really trying to meet the compliance requirements of SB 1383, they have discretion whether they want to issue enforcement actions and then further discretion whether to issue fines. But that does start in 2022. Great, thank you. Okay, I'll go ahead and ask council for their questions on this. Council member Golder. Two quick questions, not legal, but just came to me during Bob's presentation. One, is there any additional driver time associated with collecting? Because I know usually they use the arm for the cans. Yeah, that was one of the things that we were looking at with the pilot program, whether to collect that with the side loader, which collects that automated car, or whether to do a separate truck. And so what we've been finding is that it's probably gonna be an additional vehicle. We're trying to minimize what we're putting on the streets that has a fourth car. It's pretty crowded on the street already with three cars and the way parking is in the city. So one of the other options we're looking at is, we're looking at doing a system that may allow us to add food waste to the existing green waste car. But that actually will send that to a different market. It would actually go to another facility, not a city facility. So we're trying to work out the details of what the costs would be associated with that. So it will be some additional cost and a lot more driver time. Okay, and then my other question that just occurred to me just because I don't know about anyone else about the raccoons and everyone's yards, has there been any problems with raccoons or rats or other pests getting into the bins while they're out there overnight? We haven't really seen that. People usually put them out early in the morning. Actually, the only thing we've seen is somebody that's dumped out a container and stolen the little green container. So they dumped out the food waste and took the container. So that wasn't a raccoon. All right, well, cool. Thank you guys, great presentation. Sure. Council Member Covings. Thank you for the presentation. I had, I received some pretty serious concerns around this. And I know that this is kind of, you know, we don't have much control over this. And I think it is a little bit of overreach at the level of the state. But the concerns that I've been hearing about are largely around, you know, we're gonna pass, you know, if this passes today and we, you know, require compliance starting in January for residences. A lot of the questions are coming up have been around, you know, do we have the trucks to do pickup? Like, do we have bins? And another big question is, like, how much is this gonna cost residents? And that goes from single family homes to apartment complexes and do some of these commercial provisions, you know, fall in apartment complexes when you have, you know, big, when they're gonna be collecting these large amounts of organic waste. So I was wondering if you can speak to that a little bit because I just fear that a lot of people when this kind of hits are gonna be really kind of concerned with, you know, new fees and, you know, having to adjust their lives in a way that seems like it's coming out of nowhere. Sure. One of the things that, even though the SB 1383 takes effect January 1st, we knew that we'd be rolling stuff into it. That was one of the reasons that Senator Laird tried to get an extension. Even if we had ordered six months ago new carts, they wouldn't be here by January 1st. CalRecycle understands that also. So I think what they're looking for is like, was mentioned was the good faith effort and actually putting things into place. So we've started adding things as we can. Like I said, if we can look at that new system, you know, there wouldn't be an extra cost in buying new carts because we'd be able to use that existing yard waste cart that's at the curb. There are, you know, the commercial is really specifically hit and that's where, you know, it was really targeted. We've tried to do what we can to ease that in with the pilot program and try to get people to see how well it works. For the most part, we get people really wanting stuff that, you know, they wanna actually participate at this point. So there will be some additional costs. Like I mentioned, we haven't actually had a rate increase at this point since 2018. That was our last increase. And as I mentioned, this really didn't, we didn't even see final language on this until really the end of 2019. So without really knowing where, which direction we were gonna head with the collection, we really couldn't establish, you know, what we needed to look at for rates. But I think we're seeing, we've already seen rate increases in Watsonville, Scotts Valley. So what we're intending on doing is really coming back probably at the end of the first and next year when we've got a much better feel for exactly how much it's gonna cost to, you know, if we need one new truck, two new trucks, if we need to buy new containers, that type of thing. So we'll have a little better picture of that. Currently we can add people to our existing program with the material or with the equipment and vehicles and people that we have right now. So I'm not sure if I got all of your questions there. Yeah, and then I had one follow up. So when I was reading through the agenda report and then the ordinance, I saw that for the commercial, there's the delay of enforcement until 2024, but I didn't see anything around residential. And so I was wondering, because that, you know, it seems like just for people who might see this and not be aware of kind of what's going on, like, you know, being able to educate folks and have it kind of in writing that we're not gonna currently enforce until we have these things like bins and fee structures and everything in place. I just think that that might be something good to add and we're just like to get some feedback on that because it sounds like if, you know, we might have something come back to us around like the cost of bins and, you know, how we can get those ordered, you know, it might be helpful for people to understand that this is something we're putting on the books because it were mandated by state law, but, you know, you're not gonna have, you're not gonna be enforced and this isn't gonna be something that's enforced until such and such date. Well, just to reiterate the major enforcement we really go to the commercial sector. There's not really penalties. Well, there are penalties for contamination that that would really be the subject that residents would see. But, you know, we're really already doing contamination checks on residential carts and we really, like I said, it kind of refocuses how we work because right now we really try to use education and try to retrain people on how to use that correctly. You know, at the very worst we have pulled containers or increased their refuse service because they don't have enough. That's actually, you know, when you look at our customer base, it's pretty seldom that we actually go to those extremes. So, you know, we're hoping that, you know, because we've already been doing this for several years that this will really not be a huge impact to most of our customers. I can speak to that as well for the SB 1383 requirements from 2022 to 2023 jurisdictions, the city works on education and not actually enforcing the provisions of SB 1383. By January 1, 2024, that's when the city would be required to start enforcing but the first two years of the ordinance are education. And then I guess my final comment on this would be the thing that as we're educating residents about this, that we make sure that it's clear that the city will not be enforcing until 2024 and that we'll be doing these education and outreach efforts. So, thanks. Thank you, Council Member. I've got Council Member Collin Tari Johnson and then Vice Mayor Bruner. Thank you, Mayor. And thank you for the presentation. I have just a couple of questions. Some of them my colleague, Council Member Cummings, asked, there's a section in the ordinance, section 6.12031A. And how I'm understanding that is that the people can manage their own organic waste at their homes. So, is that correct? Am I interpreting that section correctly? I can read it. Producers may additionally manage their organic waste by preventing or reducing their organic waste, managing organic waste on site and or using a community composting site pursuant and then it lists the code. Yes, that's correct. We have, there's provisions for people to do composting on site, to do self hauling to another facility if they'd like or a community composter. So, how do individual residents communicate that with the city and not be subject to penalties? What's the process for that? Well, like I mentioned, really the thing we're looking at is contamination of material. So, we're not really looking to see that they're doing something specific with a finite amount of food scraps or anything like that. So, I don't really think that would actually come up with an issue. Okay. I don't know, maybe city attorney has it. No, I think that's exactly right. Contamination is really the biggest issue. And if you're composting at home, then the food scraps aren't going in the trash bin or the recycle bin. Okay, perfect. Thank you. And then my other question is around outreach to the Spanish speaking community. What are our strategies to ensure thorough outreach to the Spanish speaking community? Everything will be done in both English and Spanish, all our outreach material. Will there be any other direct concerted effort? Well, we do have actually one of our waste reduction assistance, which are the ones that actually do compliance checks as a native Spanish speaker. So, we try to make sure that actually both of them speak Spanish. One is a native Spanish speaker. So, we haven't really had any issue with that. And because we typically, especially in the commercial sector, work with the food service staff, which is, that's really their primary language. So, it's pretty critical that we do that. Thank you. Those are my questions for them. Thank you, council member. Vice mayor Bruner and then council member Brown. Okay, thank you. Thank you, Bob Nelson, for that information presentation. My question is expanding on the education outreach to the community. And maybe if you could just briefly speak to beyond the bilingual efforts, what does that look like? And the goal is by January. Am I understanding that correctly? We won't have programs rolled out by January. That's when we start rolling those out. The outreach to the community is kind of a roll out into the new year in various methods. And I just wanted to understand a little more about do you reach the account holder or does a mailer go out to each address? Is it social medias and all of the above? What does that look like? It is kind of all of the above. We just sent out a mailer to, actually it's our second one this year to commercial businesses. About 2,000 of them went out actually yesterday. So those should be showing up in the mail, within this week here. We do also do our annual mailer to residential people. But as we start, and then we, like I said, we also have people going out and working with the people, with the businesses on a continuous basis. So they will be seeing a lot of personal interaction. If we see a customer that has a lot of material, those are really the ones we target first. And we've kind of already have got those with this first pilot. So we're going to like to the next tier of people. Who has the best looking material that would be easy to add into the program. But essentially all of the education will be continuous. You're gonna start seeing stuff continuously from now on. We do Facebook, Instagram, we do a lot of outreach, through there, we do tours, our waste reduction staff is really busy in doing outreach and working with customer groups. We go to homeowner associations, we work with rental agencies. There's just really a lot of different ways because we find that no matter what you do, there's still people that you're missing. So we're trying to get anything, anything in every way that we can. Great. Thank you so much. Next I have council member Brown. Thank you. And I apologize for being out for, I got with my other job with some students and I, so I missed part of the presentation. I appreciate that you have brought this forward, put this together for us. I'm thrilled to see that we will be moving in this direction to address what I think is something that is very much of interest to a lot of people in our community in particular. And it's also very early, clearly from the staff report and what I've heard thus far here, very early in the process of recognizing that you've put a lot of work into this and this is not a reflection on the work that you've done, but we are early in the process. There are a lot of unknowns, I think just in talking with people out in the community, very briefly about this, people in the community will have a lot of questions and this is gonna potentially be a very big change in how individual households manage their waste. And so I appreciate the kind of social media and inserts into, and translation inserts, but in terms of actually getting people to understand what this means and what they're gonna be asked to do, there's a lot more to that. And so I guess I'm wondering, like recognizing that we have this timeline that the state has given us, it seems like some of the language around in the ordinance might be different with experience. And so I guess I'm wondering how you're thinking about what this ordinance is really gonna do aside from meet the state requirement. Will we, is it something that will be revised and revisited as we actually start program implementation one? And then this question around outreach, I think that Council Member Calentari-Johnson raised and Vice Mayor Bruner picked up, it just feels like there's like a lot more work is gonna have to be done to make this an effective program to achieve the goals and to not make a mess of it, right? I mean, you guys tell us these stories about what goes into the wish cycling containers and I just think this one's even messier, right? So, or potentially even messier. So I guess I just really like to hear more about ways that we can either get community engaged, get more innovative and creative about how we do that outreach. We have a master recycler program. Do you envision the possibility of like a master composter program at some point? Other ways to raise people's awareness about this and help them understand what to do instead of just feeling like, ah, I'm gonna, you know, I don't know, am I gonna get a container? Am I, how do I use the container? Am I getting in trouble? I mean, people are asking. So just wanting to make sure that we are as clear with the public as possible. This isn't really a minor change. And we do, we understand that and we have been adding this information about moving in this direction to like you mentioned, the master recyclers, that program, they've done quite a bit on that, especially with food recovery and minimizing purchases, purchasing right, not looking at expiration dates and really working with a lot of that. So we've already started adding some of that into our material. We do understand that it's gonna be a change. One thing good that you were going to see though is because everybody is doing this is that you're gonna start seeing information from every city. So as we start seeing stuff, and it will be very similar, unlike the differences we see between the recycling program between us and the county, for instance, you're gonna see this will be very, very similar. So when you start seeing things that the county puts out, it'll really be, it'll also pertain for the most part to what we're doing too. So I think we will see a little bit more, we'll be able to leverage a little bit from that. But we are always looking for things. So certainly if you have any suggestions, we'd be happy to hear those and implement whatever we can. Like we said, we're really trying to push this out as much information as we can, but knowing that it is really a process and it'll take several months into 2022 before we're really fully implemented, if that's soon, really. Are there any other council questions on this item? Okay, I'm gonna go ahead and take this out to the public now for this item. So we're on agenda item number 24, which is the amendment to the Santa Cruz Municipal Code Chapter 6.2 to comply with state mandated organic waste disposal requirements. If you're interested in speaking to this item, please press star six, excuse me, star nine on your phone to raise your hand at this point. And I'm gonna look at our meeting attendees now. I'm not seeing any hands coming up. I'll go ahead and bring this back and see council member Cummings. Yeah, I'm happy to move the item. I just sent Bonnie just a little bit of addition and clarification, it's a little bit additional language for the motion. I think it falls in line with everything we've been discussing, but the motion would be to accept the staff recommendation to introduce for publication in ordinance amending chapter 6.12 and adding sections 3.08260 of the Santa Cruz Municipal Code in order to comply with state mandated organic waste disposal requirements and to establish a recycled and organic waste procurement policy. And then the additional language, which I think should be pretty acceptable in line with what this is, but develop and conduct community education and outreach and delay enforcement until January 1st, 2024. And I think we've heard that that's really the plan. But I just wanted to make sure that it was clear for the public that really for the next two years we're gonna be focusing on education and outreach and we're not gonna be conducting that enforcement. And council member Golder. I'm happy to second that. I just looked to the staff, especially since this is an ordinance, I'm assuming those changes are amenable to both our attorney and Bob and staff. Yeah, I also wanted to note that the delay in enforcement is in the ordinance as well. So if we look to section, sorry, 6.12.120 and we go down to I and J. So it says the education period for non-compliance is from 2022 to 2023. And then enforcement begins in 2024. Thank you for pointing that out. Okay, we have a motion on the table to approve the amendment to the Santa Cruz Municipal Codes chapter 6.12 to comply with state mandated organic waste disposal requirements and adding section 3.08.260 to the Santa Cruz Municipal Code to establish recycled and organic waste procurement policy to comply with state Senate Bill 1383. And the two changes were to direct to also establish outreach, education and outreach, and then to reestablish that enforcement would not start till January, 2024. Bonnie, can we do a roll call vote? Sorry, that motion was by council member Cummings and seconded by council member Golder. We have a roll call vote, please. Council member Watkins. Aye. Calentary Johnson. Aye. Brown, vice mayor Brunner. Aye. Mayor Myers. Aye. That motion passes unanimously. Excuse me. Sorry, that motion passes unanimously. We're now gonna move into oral communications. The members, for members of the public who are streaming this meeting, if you want to comment during oral communications, now is the time to call in. Instructions are on your screen. Oral communications is an opportunity for members of the community to speak to us on items that are not listed on today's agenda. If you're interested in addressing the council, press star nine on your phone to raise your hand. You will have two minutes to speak. When it's your time to speak, you will hear an announcement that you have been unmuted. We request that you clearly and slowly state your name before making your comments so that we can accurately capture in the meeting minutes. However, it is not required. Please remember, this is a time for council to hear from the public. We are not able to engage in dialogue with each member of the public, but when we are able, we will address the questions raised after oral communication has been completed. I'm gonna go ahead and take a look at folks in our audience today. And I see two hands up today for oral communications. The first will be Rafa Sonnenfeld. And again, press star nine, or excuse me, star six to unmute yourself. Good afternoon, council members. This is Rafa Sonnenfeld. Today I am speaking on behalf of the EMB Law with regards to the 831 Water Project. As you know, you denied the project at the city council's last meeting. And this was an illegal action by the city of Santa Cruz. And we hope that the city will still attempt to find a solution to approve the project. And we expect that you will approve the project, hopefully by the second council meeting in November. If the city doesn't approve the project that the density applied for as part of this SB35 application, EMB Law will be suing the city. It's a loss that you're not gonna be able to win. So you basically have a month here to figure out how you're gonna get this project approved because the judge will approve it for you. Thank you very much. Thank you. Next up, I have phone number ending in 1810. Go ahead, please. Yeah, hi, this is Garrett. I'm not optimistic that secular state worshiping leftists won't continue to destroy everything they touch. It's incredibly small-minded to think that the most important thing about a person is their race, not beliefs, not behavior, not values. It's incredibly dangerous to freedom and poison the unity to think that some individuals of some race are currently disempowered, others of some race privileged, and that the government should be empowered to remove individual rights at will, redistribute wealth at will, justified by different lifetimes of events no longer in evidence. Strangely, merit has no value. Discriminatory racial gender quotas have value. An ideology asserting a collective's right to the lives and everything else of an individual instead of production or trade risks the most prosperous, most powerful, freest country ever. Their sense of entitlement has no bounds. They have little sense of property ownership. Don't believe in the greatest wealth creation mechanism in history and capitalism. And ignore the horrendous history of lessons of misery, poverty, and death by socialism and communism. Every government funding of the Nandy State chokes the economy. Every new dependency on the government erodes freedom. I'm still waiting years later to ever hear the word prosperity mentioned here. It's logic turned on its head to refer to an open-air drug crime cesspool as community members entitled to free housing who give nothing in return. That having more of something than someone else is an injustice seems an incredible conclusion. Or silence is violence, or disagreement is violence, or offending someone is violence, but actual extreme violence is somehow a peacefully justified protest is confounding as is defunding the police over a dozen or so unarmed shootings when 10,000 black people are 90% murdered by other black people every year and defunding will certainly worsen that. That there is such worship of an organization of self-avowed Marxist anarchists who employ mob violence to the end of destroying the entire institution of criminal justice goes mostly unquestioned and dims the prospects for a better future. People need to choose whether they want to give their life up to the whims of an unaccountable authoritarian state gone anti-American leftoid mad or choose a life with liberty and the right to prosperity. Thanks. Seeing any other hands up for oral communications. So with that, we are going to adjourn until 4 p.m. today and at 4 p.m., we will take up item number 25. Thank you, everyone. Bonnie, are you ready to go? Yes, we're ready. Good afternoon. Next up on our agenda for the Santa Cruz City Council is item number 25 and ordinance of the City Council of the City of Santa Cruz amending title 10 vehicles and traffic at chapter 10.04 definitions and chapter 10.40 stopping, standing and parking and chapter 10.41 citywide parking permit pertaining to the parking of oversized vehicles and chapter 16.19 stormwater and urban runoff pollution control at section 16.19.070 discharge of sewage prohibited. For members of the public who are streaming this meeting if this is an item you want to comment on now is the time to call in using the instructions on your screen. The order will be a presentation of the item by staff followed by questions from the council. Council members will then take a break for 45 minutes while members of the public participate in a web-based public input activity that can be accessed at cityofsantacruise.com slash community feedback all one word. After the web-based comments are received we will proceed with public comment which is net today is limited to 60 minutes and then return to the council for deliberation and action. Please note in order to hear from any as many members of the public as possible the time will be limited to one minute per person and two minutes for previously approved groups. And when we return back I will give the order of the previously approved groups. We'll have four groups today speaking as approved groups. So again, I wanna just make sure I gave that the web-based public input activity can be located at cityofsantacruise.com forward slash community feedback. And that is a online portal that you can use program that you can use to go ahead and put in your feedback on this ordinance using that software package. I'm gonna now turn this over to the council members who have brought this item forward for their presentation this afternoon. Thank you, Mayor Myers. I can begin and then I'll pass it on to council members Golder and Calentari Johnson. So since we brought this forward as an introduction during our last meeting today we are bringing it forward for a first reading. And since the introduction I just wanted to speak a little bit to the outreach and communications that we received since we introduced the framework and the ideas in the ordinance amendments and the safe parking program. And that outreach, I'm gonna grab my notes. We received a lot of emails. So thank you to everyone who emailed and corresponded with very specific additions and edits and comments. We had in-person meetings. We had meetings with different groups and different service health providers. We had walkthroughs and talk to people living in oversized vehicles, neighborhood groups. And a lot of people reached out to us as it really felt like a community input in a very short time since our last meeting. So we appreciate all of that input. We really try to implement the concepts of the need to balance the time, place and manner of vehicle, the oversized vehicle parking on city streets. And we heard from a lot of people, the simultaneous need to explore services for unhoused folks living in their oversized vehicles. So you'll see as I pass this over some of those specifics that we've implemented and proposed. And if there's anything else I left out with community outreach, I'll let council member Golder and Calentari Johnson chime in. Thank you, Vice Mayor. I think you pretty accurately communicated how we conducted outreach over the last couple weeks. In addition to outreach, we did a lot of research, specifically around other cities in California that have similar oversized vehicle ordinances. There's close to 29, almost 30 I think in the state that we looked at, including Manhattan Beach, Ventura, Coronado, Long Beach, San Diego, Eureka, Fort Bragg, Santa Barbara, LA, Berkeley, Santa Monica, Morro Bay, Oceanside. And so it's a complex issue that's not unique to Santa Cruz. And so we just tried to look at some of the strategies that other jurisdictions implemented and tried to pull from their knowledge what we could. And kind of borrow it for us to use here in Santa Cruz. So I'll turn it over to council member Calentari Johnson to talk about some of the services that we've tried to incorporate with the ordinance as well. All right, thank you. And I will also just say the last time we came to the public and council, there were presentations on the data that's been collected, the impacts and including environmental and public health impacts. And so that's all included in the packet and we didn't wanna repeat all of that since you've heard it once and it's in the packet, but happy to either us as council members or the staff we've been working with to respond to any of those questions. So as a vice mayor Brenner and council member Golder mentioned, what we are bringing forward to you does look different from a month ago and that's because we have really taken to heart everything that we've heard. We've tried to incorporate as best as we could and respond to the community needs on sort of all directions. And the services approach, one thing this gives us an opportunity to do, absolutely address and respond to the negative impacts of oversized vehicles on city streets as well as have the services oriented approach. So what the proposal before you is, is a tiered approach. We can't do the Cadillac robust immediately. That's not practical or feasible. So what we're proposing is with the first tier being emergency safe parking spaces effective immediately as soon as this ordinance shouldn't be approved. And that's a minimum of three spaces. And this is really for emergency purposes, those vehicles and individuals living in these vehicles who need support and registration and repairs. And as is indicated in the agenda report, there are community groups that are actively working on financially helping with those pieces. The second tier, which is to be effective within four months of the passing of the ordinance is the safe overnight parking. So this is the middle tier that what's proposed is a minimum of 30 spaces spread throughout the city on city-owned properties or other non-residential approved spaces. And it would have a level of monitoring. And we would also look at sanitation and waste. So that's the second tier. And then the third tier is really what we have seen as effective with some of the service providers in our community that includes case management and it includes a very intentional pathway to housing. And what we've done here is we've really talked to a lot of people from the public health and service faith community and nonprofit world to build what's here and to make it robust. And the proposal is to really focus it on very specific subpopulations of those who are unhoused and as is here in the report, I'll reiterate it. That is families with children, seniors, transition age youth. So that's youth under the age of 25 who are unaccompanied and unhoused, veterans and individuals with disabilities. So these are the groups that would be prioritized. And what we've heard is that this sort of robust tier three is as we're calling it, what are we calling it here? Safe parking program, the robust safe parking program does have outcomes. People are placed into housing and have their needs met. So that's what we aspire to, but we know that we need to be thoughtful and we need to think about cost sharing and bring in partners. So we're not going to rush that, but with this proposal, we are committing to it. So I think I'll pause there and see if I missed anything that council member Golder or vice mayor Bruder, you want to add, and if not, I'll pass it along to Lee Butler. We're good. Okay. So I'll pass it along to Lee Butler. Good afternoon, mayor and council members. Thank you. I am going to share my screen here. All right. Are you seeing the presentation there? Great. Yes, we can. Okay. I'm Lee Butler. I'm deputy city manager overseeing planning, community development and homelessness response. And I've got seven or eight slides for you. You heard about this issue in late September. And so I'll try to go through the background really quickly and get to the contents of the ordinance. So back in 2015, the council adopted and oversized vehicle ordinance and that coastal development permit associated with that ordinance ultimately went to the coastal commission in 2016. The coastal commission did not take a final action approving or denying that, that coastal development permit. And we have referenced the September 2021 discussion late last month, where the subcommittee that consists of the vice mayor and council members, Golder and Calentary Johnson, they came together and met with staff on multiple occasions between that meeting and now to talk through changes to the ordinance as well as the safe parking program that council member Calentary Johnson spoke to. I am going to go ahead and jump into the ordinance provisions here and the oversized vehicle definition states that vehicles that are greater than or equal to 20 feet long or vehicles that are greater than eight feet tall and seven feet wide are really what's being regulated by this ordinance. There's some minor exceptions when you talk about trailers, but in general, this is the definition. And the prohibitions that the ordinance outlines, I'll start with those. Oversized vehicles cannot park on city streets between midnight and 5 a.m. unless allowed through other provisions, which we'll get to in a couple of minutes here. There are prohibitions on electric gas and other utility connections extending into the public right away to connect a vehicle. So, you know, running extension cords or something across a sidewalk. Open fires are prohibited as are unsafe, untidy or unsanitary conditions. Unattached trailers, I mentioned that before. Those are prohibited by this draft ordinance. And then oversized vehicles where they are, where they have a permit or they're otherwise allowed to park, they're still not allowed to park within 100 feet of an intersection or within that distance of other traffic control devices. So a flashing beacon for pedestrians and so forth, so that visibility in those key areas is better maintained. Moving on to the allowances, participants in a safe parking or other city sanctioned program would be allowed. There are allowances for oversized vehicles in those programs. There are also allowances for public vehicles, like local state or federal government vehicles, also public utility vehicles. There's some exemptions related to that. And then if a commercial vehicle is parked for unloading or loading, then there's some exemptions related to that. There are also permits that can be issued to commercial vehicles. This was something that the community had expressed some concerns over and the council members incorporated language that allows permits to be issued. Say you're a contractor and your truck exceeds those size specifications. There are allowances to get a permit for that. There's also an allowance for hotels to issue permits. So if someone is staying in your hotel and they're driving an oversized vehicle, they could issue a permit to the hotel guest. And then finally, which I'll talk about a little bit more here, there are permits for residents and visitors. And there we go. Residents can get a permit issued that would be valid for up to one year. Each permit would allow for four periods of 72 hours per month. So if someone is getting ready for and packing for a trip or coming back and unpacking from a trip, that would be allowed for the resident. If that resident has an out-of-town visitor, or any resident has an out-of-town visitor, they can apply for a permit that would allow for that out-of-town visitor to stay for a 72-hour period and park on street during that time. And the draft ordinance would allow for six of those permits to be issued per address per year. So if you've got a house or an apartment and you've got six times when a guest could come and visit you and get one of these 72-hour permits. Dr. Johnson spoke to the Safe Parking Program Tears. And so I won't jump into a lot of details related to those other than pointing out some of the information that was identified in the agenda report that we would be looking at roughly, and I will say we've taken a closer look at this since the agenda report comes out, since it went out, but we still haven't gotten formal bids on some of this. But roughly you could expect them for tier two with the basic service, the security and monitoring, the trash services and the porta-potties that would run in the range of about 150,000 per year. If we were to install a dump station and we had any staffing or servicing of that, that would not be included with that. And then if there is towing that's needed, let's say you've got a facility, a program, a site up and running, but then a person does not leave. That lot is likely going to be utilized for some other program, whether it's downtown parking or something else during the day. And if that individual isn't leaving, then there may be a need to tow the vehicle. And so there could be costs associated with that from police's perspective as well. And then finally, tier three, a robust program. It's gonna probably range in that order of 300 to 500,000 and that's gonna depend on the level of services. And of course for tier one, two or three, if you're spreading things out, there can be some additional costs. There is some economy of scale if they're together with servicing of trash and restrooms and so forth. And then the draft ordinance does specify that the city manager is to develop operational criteria for these safe parking programs. Last but not least, I wanted to talk to you about violations. We heard a lot from the community related to this. And if there is an oversized vehicle that is parked or is standing in a manner that violates provisions of this ordinance, that vehicle would be subject to a parking ticket. So that's the first set of violations. There's also two other references in there, in the draft ordinance. There's a reference to an infraction and that would be something like the utility connections that I referenced previously. And then there is a reference to misdemeanors in the ordinance. And that specifies, there are two sections where the prohibited fires, fires would be subject to misdemeanor citation, as well as maintenance of an area in an unsafe, untidy or unsanitary condition could result in a misdemeanor fine. And with that, I am available for any questions that you may have. So does that conclude all the reports on this item so far? So I'll go ahead and bring this back to the council and see if there are questions at this point in time. Any questions from council members at this time? Council member Cummings. Thank you for the presentation. And I want to just acknowledge all the work that's gone into this. Homelessness is probably the most difficult issue to address in our community along with housing, well, affordable housing creation. So, you know, there's no magic bullet for sure. But I do have some questions because the first of which, you know, this isn't the first time this kind of ordinance has come to our attention. First time it came to the council in 2016, it was passed. This is mentioned in the report. The ordinance was appealed to the Coastal Commission and that's really what has prevented this ordinance from being enacted. Well, the one that was passed in 2017, which is now before us again with some different wording. Was there any communications with the Coastal Commission seeing as how that was the agency that had the most concern with the ordinance back in 2016? And I'm just wondering, because it wasn't stated in the report, so I'm just curious. I'm happy to speak to that. I have had a couple of conversations and Brian Borguno, who, yes, who is on the line as well. He participated in one of those conversations as well. And the commission staff generally just reiterated the comments that we heard from the Coastal Commission back in 2016. So I mean, it sounds like this would still likely need to go back. It could get appealed to the Coastal Commission and we could be in the same place that we're currently on right now. That would be my expectation is that following up on this, if the council approved this ordinance, that we would follow that same path with a new Coastal Development Permit and assuming that is approved, I would venture a guess that that would be appealed to the Coastal Commission and then the Coastal Commission would be in a position to take action on it. Thanks. And then I did have a question regarding the recommendation that's before us this evening as well. So I've been going over the ordinance language and in the agenda report, there's a number of mentions about bringing forward short-term, well, a lot of the safe sleeping programs. And then when kind of flipping through the actual ordinance itself, item M, it's on page six of nine in the red line version is when I'm looking at city operator sponsored safe parking programs. And it says in addition to the, in addition to private property allowances authorized through chapter 6.36.030, the city may operate sponsor or authorize safe parking programs for vehicles on any city and lease properties in the city or any city section, city section private parking lots. And then it mentions how the city manager should develop the policy, but it doesn't, I think what we were hearing, what we saw in the report and what we just heard in our presentation was that this was something that was going to be happening. And so that because of the fact that May is there, it doesn't seem like there's a requirement on behalf of the city to provide the safe parking programs. And so I'm just curious, you know, if we're kind of, if this, if what's before us is telling the city that we're going to establish emergency parking immediately, which I think that my understanding was that, that would likely require an emergency ordinance and that the city is going to create all these other programs. That's not reflective in the ordinance language itself. And there's no like actual recommendation before us. So I'm just wondering if you can speak to that because I think that might be a point of confusion for some people in the community. Would you like me to start? House members. Yeah, happy to. I'm happy to chime in. I'll have Lee and then vice mayor. Okay. So thank you for those comments. Council member Cummings. I would say first off, if it's the pleasure of the council, you know, that language can be shifted is the first thing that I would say, you know, the May that's identified there could be modified to reflect various desires of the council. So it could say, you know, shall develop and that would also be consistent with the direction that I'm hearing from the vice mayor and the other council members with respect to the emergency spaces. I will say the anticipated location for those would be the same place that we have operated the safe parking program previously. There were two spaces at the police station and so putting those at that location is likely where we would first where we would first go. And then the other, you know, longer term 30 spaces in tier two for example, we do need to work on, you know, where those would go the operational criteria associated with them and the ordinance itself would be in effect, you know, if the council chooses to approve this, the ordinance would be in effect prior to implementation of that because it is going to take a few months and working with parking team to and others public works to get all of those provisions in order. Thanks. And then I guess this is. Did you want to add to that? Sorry. I did want to also reiterate the word that council member Cummings brought up may versus shall. I think in this context with item M, it was related to locations since currently private lots can allow oversized parking and this was related to additional locations that the city could have as options versus the safe parking programs. So I would like to add to that. I would like to add the location piece of it and maybe Cassie could chime in to that point. But certainly I understand your point council member Cummings in that language. So that's all I wanted to add. So I'd be happy to chime in on this. So our current municipal code allows the operations of these locations select other locations. So that's what the current currently allows. And so submission M I believe talks about city owned or lease properties specifically. Or even city sanctioned private lots. Yeah, which would be city leased. Thanks for the clarification. And then I just have one other question. I can make a comment later on. Sorry. The last the last question I had was just a round. I know the cost was brought up for the safe sleeping. But I've also had some conversations and it's unclear, you know, in terms of enforcement. I know that this came to the last meeting, but you know, identifying a place, you know, if someone's in violation for their multiple violations, they get their RV towed. It's not clear how like how we would cover those costs and where that would go. And I know, and this has come up because there's actually someone who's contacted me a number of times about a fifth wheel that has been in a place for a very long time. And as I started having conversations with city staff, they were saying, you know, we don't have a place for this to actually go. And so I'm kind of curious as to whether or not locations have been identified or if there's someone who we're going to be able to work with. And then how we're going to pay for it, especially since we're in this huge fiscal deficit right now. Can I make a few comments on this? Perfect. So clearly the question about storage of RVs during the timeframe that, you know, whether maybe towed away, it's a big issue. And we are working on trying to locate a place to, you know, allow that to happen in a way that work. It's not a simple problem. And, you know, I think we will ultimately find an answer, but the landfill is not really a potential answer at this moment. For all the reasons, I think most of you are aware of including the construction project that's going on there. With respect to the cost, I would say that this, the towing or the dealing with, you know, units that need to be moved is not the only kind of cost that has not been planned for. And we are working as a staff on bringing the information to the council at the next meeting that's kind of this forward looking financial planning thing. And you'll get to see kind of, you know, what some of the unfunded costs are for the homelessness programs, not just for this ordinance, but potentially for the camping standards and services, services and standards ordinance and other things, including things like capital, you know, projects for a general fund capital projects, which we're not putting into the, you know, on the budget and we haven't had money for four years. So we're going to start talking about that and clearly the revenue group that's gotten put together is a piece of that puzzle, but there's other, you know, conversations we're going to be having with the council over the next many months to really talk about these issues. And then we budget, which comes in May, you will really have, you know, given us feedback that will help us shape that in a way that that begins to address, like, you know, how we're going to actually pay for some of these things. Thank you very much. And I just want to say I made a, I just wanted to make a correction. I was reading the subject line and was when I was making those comments and I see all the language about the same parking program. So apologies for that. Thank you. Thank you. Council member Cummings. I've got council member Brown and then council member commentary Johnson. Thank you, mayor. So I have questions in about in three areas. One related to engagement. Another related to the ordinance itself and the kind of muni code, the universe in which the muni code intersects with some of the issues that we're trying to address here. And then resources and I think council member Cummings has asked some of that and I have just a follow up. So I'll try to be quick with these. So the first question is related to community engagement. First, I want to say thank you to the staff that's worked on this. I know it's like really, really challenging and trying to work your way through something that is, you know, just so multifaceted and, you know, difficult and causes high levels of emotion kind of all around is really difficult. So I just want to acknowledge that and council members who have stepped up and been willing to put in that time to have those conversations and do the research. So I do really appreciate your work. So question related to community engagement. Often we get, and these are usually when they're more formal community engagement processes lists of like, who was, you know, what stakeholders were engaged. And so I'm just wondering if you all, if you have a list or if you could tell us like who was engaged, who you reached out to. Not, I don't need to hear that here, but can, can we get a list? I mean, you know, there are a lot of groups and a lot of folks who are interested and engaged and I just don't know who the ones were that you talked with. And I don't need the micro level detail, but it would just be helpful to know kind of who's weighed in. So that's one question. And if you want to speak to it now, I please do. But I didn't want to put you on the spot and like give me the list right now. I just, it would be helpful to know a little more about that. I'll speak up. We, we did keep a list. We kept a Google sheet though. So we do who, who, who was speaking to whom. And so we kept, you know, kind of an informal list. And then when we went to meetings, we just documented who, when, where, how many people. Is that something that could be shared in some form with the council? I don't see why not, but I think I could return to the city attorney on that. I just also just. Time in really quickly. We kept a spreadsheet for our internal purposes, but I've never seen. I know I'm, I'm a year into this. I've never seen a list with people's names in this kind of an effort and, and we did give an overview of the sectors and groups we've engaged with, including neighborhoods, people with lived experience, faith community service providers and public health, but some clarity from the city attorney would be great. Yeah. It would be helpful. I'll just say if I could, you know, I don't need me, you know, I don't want the names because I want to go follow. I mean, I just think that I have no idea. I mean, the nonprofit sector is a big sector. And I know lots of non, I'm just saying this is an example. I know lots of nonprofit sector. Keep players who and out of all of them, only one of them has told me they've talked with you. So it's like that kind of, I just have no idea who, who else it is, you know, I mean, and so I'm not asking for, you know, to out all the people who were involved in this conversation. I'm asking because I want to know, I don't know anybody who was engaged aside from one individual who called me to try to get some clarity on something. So it's just like, it's just hard for me to without any additional information, kind of have an under feel like I understand where that engagement happened. So I hear you difficult, but it just see, I mean, we get those reports from staff when they do stakeholder engagement activities. Thank you, Council Member Brown. I just wanted to add quickly that some of the outreach that we did was, you know, a lot of people contacted us and all of us actually, I think some of us received where we were all copied on emails and contacts. And so that those were, that was like our major first step was incorporating really gathering all those pieces of suggestions in each email and kind of mapping it out and plugging in to where what section and how like we spent a lot of time on that kind of contact, which was a variety. I think we were all CC copied on there. So more, I guess I just want again for clarity purposes, not so much stakeholder engagement as just processing public comment. It was a key piece of here. Is that what I'm just trying to understand? Yeah. And then today, my understanding is for this to be a first reading is now we have, we've gotten it to a place where we've made edits based on all that input that we've received. And now for the first reading, we have opportunities for further comments on this. And yeah. I get that. And I'm not, my intention is not to dismiss that as I say this, but like it just, that just helps me understand. So like people who are interested just ought to be paying attention and be in touch with you is kind of what it sounds like here. Work in touch with the council. Again, I don't mean to be difficult. I just, I'm just really trying to understand like, you know, who's like, there are a lot of people involved in concern with these issues. And reading comment, reading emails about and what people have to say is important. And having deep conversations with people about what is to be done is important. And I don't know who those deep conversations happen with. So it's hard for me to, you know, know what to do about how to make my decisions given that. But I'll leave it there for now. I have two other areas of question, which I thought were going to be more, more complicated, but maybe not. In terms of the prohibitions in the, in the ordinance draft, and this is not, this is the perennial question I will keep asking until I feel like I understand. There are, there are particular activities that are laid out as violations under this ordinance. And I'm thinking particularly with respect to on page two, bottom of page two to nine, C through E, C through D, B through D, C and D, I guess. These are the ones that are related to burning materials, campfires, connections to public energy sources that obstruct the right-of-way and also kind of the unsanitary and hygienic surroundings, right? Those three, that's C and D. And so I guess I'm just wondering can we, they are covered in other sections of our muni code, maybe at some point can we just get, you know, because I just didn't have time to go searching for them in our muni code repository, which I could do and I could find them all, but can we, like, hear where else this is covered? It would just be helpful to understand, like, you know, if you're a police officer and you're going out to enforce, are you, what you're going to, what muni code you're going to issue that citation on, and I don't want to, I'm not asking this because I want to, like, again, go super far into the weeds, I just want to understand how they intersect and what that might mean programmatically and enforcement-wise moving forward. Do you want me to take a first crack? If you've got it now, again, it's on the spot, so if I, you know, this is sort of like as an FYI for the future as well is fine, but if you have it now. So, you know, off the top of my head, I'm sorry, with respect to the open fire and burning, I do know there are a couple of other places in our muni code that talk about that, but I don't have those off the top of my head and I'm sorry to say that I don't have the answers to that right away. I could look that up at some point during the meeting probably today, but I don't have that. With respect to sort of unhygienic and safe, that would generally just be covered under general nuisance law, public nuisance law, which is in the penal code. You know, we have Bernie Escalante here, too, and he might be able to comment on it, but I do, talking with officers, I do think that it is helpful to have something that is a little bit more specific from their end, just because that public nuisance framework in the penal code is really broad and it is hard for them to tell exactly when that has been committed. And also on top of that, you know, the public nuisance crimes are prosecuted by the district attorney as is the penal code. So it is potentially helpful to have a section like this that would be in our municipal code because that would allow city attorney prosecution of this, which this can be helpful as we are a little bit more clued in with respect to who the super problematic individuals in town might be and the city attorney might care about that a little bit more than the district attorney to be honest with you. So those are my initial comments on that and we could certainly provide the list about fires at another time. Thank you. And I know we've talked about this and so I don't want to belabor it. Maybe I'll check in with you offline and see if I just want to have it would be great to have that in my head and it would help me understand better. So thank you. And then the last question I had was related to resources once again. We talk about the fact that we don't have funding for the services side and that we need to figure out how to move forward in that arena on board for that conversation and but the enforcement piece is also going to have additional costs I mean if we if all things being equal we're still going to have the same number of police officers on the streets you know the same number of personnel to take those calls and try to dispatch etc. So but we are going to have this new set of tools so I guess I'm just wondering it seems to me to make those effective we are going to need to increase resources on the enforcement side too and I'm just wondering if you've talked about that if there are any proposals coming our way or if this is kind of we're still too early on for that. So I think I should take that one also the you're correct there are activities that are already underway that relate to enforcement on this kind of thing on the camping and other kinds of services right which is one of the reasons why we're doing the management partner study to try to get a sense of where in the organization costs are embedded for this kind of thing so that we can kind of talk about the whole picture and I do think that as we start to look forward we do need to be thinking kind of strategically about what's the right resource mix to that is associated with achieving what the council's direction is on both of these ordinances right the SSO and this one and we're not going to just bury all that stuff we're going to put it out there and talk to you about what that means and kind of you know what the challenges are associated with it as well as the resources and the benefits etc so I think at least going forward that's the direction we're pursuing and it is a little bit of a chicken and an egg kind of a thing at this point so we get this direction that we have clarity on the both the camping side and the RV side or the OB side and you know we can start to work that information up you're going to begin to see some of the basic assumptions coming forward as soon as two weeks from now and undoubtedly it will be refined and you know you'll have questions and you want to look at this or look at that and so that's the kind of thing that we will be doing over the coming months. Thank you. I appreciate that. Thank you councilmember I will go ahead and call on councilmember Contar Johnson and then councilmember Watkins and then I just have one question I'll keep myself in there. Great thank you mayor I wanted to respond to some of my colleagues questions there was a question about whether we would be in the same exact position as we were several years ago with the coastal commission and what the coastal commission concerns were I've watched that video a couple of times and gone over the documents and the two pieces that stuck out was the lack of quantitative data that that specifies the impacts as well as proposed alternatives. What we have here before the council today provides that we have quantitative data that lines the impacts and we have proposed alternatives so I don't believe the position that we were five six years ago when this came to the coastal commission there was also a concern that the safe parking framework is not in the ordinance so are we committed to it as far as I understand if it's part of the policy direction and in the motion then the council is committing to that policy direction and staff is committing to implementing the framework so that's how I see the safe parking program as if this should pass the council committing to it the other let's see revenue and cost is absolutely a concern and I just I want to reiterate that we had an opportunity for revenue tax measure and unfortunately we weren't able to reach an agreement and that brings us to this point and it's just more for us to come together to make something happen is really what I want to say there that it's urgent we need to work on a revenue measure immediately and these are the reasons why so we can serve who are on house so we can move forward with our project so and then I just want to take a moment around community engagement I just I have to say that often I feel like it's used as a crutch we were very intentional about community engagement and it's I believe whether I'm working actively on a policy issue or not it's my responsibility that's what I've signed up for is to go out and communicate with the community and and and hear their concerns and communicate that with staff knowing that staff will bring it to light with a group of council members who are working on it I didn't see any of that I didn't hear from other council members in fact I sent a direct email to council member council member who mentioned that they had heard community concerns and and I said well if those community members are interested in connecting I'm happy to I didn't hear back so I just you know yes we went out and talked to from my perspective a diverse group of individuals it was people who expressed interest it was people also that I had worked with and the vice mayor Brunner and council member Golder we worked with people in our networks in our outer networks and people who came to us and I would hope I would ask my colleagues with this issue and other issues if you have other networks and you have other sectors and you've talked to them and you've heard something communicate that to the staff so we have it in process of as we're like developing the framework and putting together the ordinance I know that I received hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of letters in support lots of emails that gave specifics about what we should consider and those were taken into consideration so I just I get really it's really challenging for me to hear about community engagement and then not have not have it laid out like what what is the expectation what does it look like so I guess I've put out my request in my ask in terms of what I would like for my colleagues for community engagement please talk to the people you're connected with I'm not connected to everybody if there are individuals that you're connected with that I should talk to please let me know if that doesn't feel like that I should talk to the people you're connected with that I should talk to the community engagement and then we will please communicate it with staff so it can be taken into consideration this is not new this is as we've said this is years in the making there was a policy direction that came from our council in June and then we introduced the idea again last month so the area around community engagement I just you know I'll just stop there yeah and thank you councilmember I think you touched on some of my comments and points I think that I hear behind your committed request isn't is ultimately trying to get the most voices it hurt and then the most informed policy outcome designed and I stand behind that and share your commitment that and I don't feel that the responsibility falls on the shoulders of those who are interested in trying to seek solutions alone that we all play role in that so I accept your request I you know heard from some folks I forward those comments to those staff members that I felt should receive those I walked out there about a month ago so I got to see firsthand spoke to some neighbors and and I didn't do the extensive community outreach process that you did but try to do my role as an individual council member as well to help inform this policy process and I think ultimately at the end of the day we all share real interest in having all of the voices heard so we can design the best policy solution for our community and moving forward I appreciate those comments and respectfully accept I guess my question is really around the tiered approach which I really appreciate and I guess in terms of the families first and I know that comes in sort of the third tier in regards to kind of generating that robust state parking program but my understanding is that we currently have from the county but in general sort of a priority for families particularly working with school sites and really identifying locations you know for them to safely sleep if they are identified so I just wanted to see like I think that's already in place hopefully that's still a priority as we continue to move through kind of the tiers of response but I'd like to see that as some I know it's been expressed at a prior kind of time but I'd like to see that as continued commitment and you know as a priority population before the tiered three kind of takes effect and maybe Lee you have more information about where we are with sort of that that process in collaboration with AFC in the county. I'm happy to speak generally to councilmember Watkins you know when there are additional resources in the county where they do try to prioritize families and when we encounter families out in the field we do try to connect those individuals to those county resources and it's been my experience that they have that the county has been responsive and helpful in those efforts and so you know the Rebley family shelter for example is one of the locations where families have opportunities to have shelter and avoid some of the encampments where we've encountered them. Maybe one just additional commenter thought and I'm happy to look into that the county office sort of wins but you know if there's training or if there's resources to provide to the officers or anybody doing some sort of type of compliance or enforcement or call that they're aware of what you know is in place for families particularly is the priority and we can continue to support that subpopulation since it's already been identified as a critical area of need so however I can offer any kind of additional information please let me know. Thank you. Okay I just have one question and it's for Lee my understanding in talking with some additional communities around California that are in the coastal zone that there has been successful ordinances recently approved by coastal right or at least the approach to some of these issues is that correct? Did you find that or are they all in appeal? We know. It's like Cassie's Cassie great. So I have not seen a specific coastal approved ordinance that may exist out there. I do know that there are coastal jurisdictions that have passed similar ordinances that have not got the coastal development permit and we do know that coastal has taken a position that that is necessary so I'll just sort of leave it at that but that's the status as I understand it although Lee may be aware of a coastal approved ordinance. I'm not with respect to a recent one. Okay so that's a typical response to coastal by many many people whether they're building a house or they're building a bench in a parking lot near the beach many jurisdictions avoid that step trying to do the permit which usually is where the PSU comes in. So that might my misunderstanding on exactly kind of what was explained to me but so that was my only question right now what I'd like to do if there's no other questions right now from council is to go ahead and start the 45 minutes of taking public comment via the web based public input portal that we have. I don't know Elizabeth if you are available to just sort of show what that looks like to people again if you've sent in a letter or an email or any other written comment I don't think you feel you know you can obviously definitely comment again but we have received all of those and we do review all of those but Elizabeth maybe you could just do a quick demo so people kind of see what it looks like this is Elizabeth Smith she's our public information officer she'll also be online during this 45 minute period so if you have questions she can try to help you use it basically what we're going to do is take a break for 45 minutes we'll have this ability for folks to give us their feedback and then we'll come back we'll continue with 60 minutes of public comment starting with the two minutes for four groups and those groups are going to be in this order Santa Cruz people over policy policing Santa Cruz cares stepping up Santa Cruz and west side Santa Cruz so that'll be the order we'll have those four groups at two minutes each to start with and then we'll have 60 minutes with a limit of one per person and then we'll go ahead and bring this back to the city council for deliberation Elizabeth maybe you could take a give a quick demo at the end of this 45 minute period our staff will will also collect the information and do a report out for council so Elizabeth maybe I'll turn it over to you for a very quick little demo before we take the 40 minute period it's a you can access the website directly at bit.ly if you want to make a comment you look at each of these you'll see categories at the top you can add your comments under a category so if you have a comment about permits and fees you would hit the plus sign and then you would write your comments down below or in the subject and if you'd like to give it a subject line and then once you've written that comment you hit publish and it shows up on the screen and so we'll leave this up I'm going to be monitoring I noticed that there's some folks who are repeating comments across there's no need to do that you can just put your comment on there once and we'll make sure that all of these comments are downloaded and saved and we'll post them on the website after this session in addition to sharing them with staff and council members so I'll be here watching the conversation thanks thank you Elizabeth okay we're going to go ahead and take a 45 minute break council will be offline and we will continue our public comment when we return at 545 thank you everybody okay Elizabeth excuse me we're about at time so if council members can turn their cameras back on we'll go ahead and get started Rosemary do we want to summarize things now before we go to the next stage of public comment hi Donna I believe that Elizabeth is working on some summaries okay great just a few comments three council members yeah there we go we're going to take in Martina if you're here if you could turn on your camera I'm not seeing council member coming back yet what do you think Rosemary think we can start back up there's Elizabeth I'm just doing one final okay thank you should try to summarize what folks have said great thank you sure sorry it's a meaty discussion so you guys will have a lot to dig into it's after the fact too we ready for a summary we are we'll go ahead and reconvene for those who are just just joining us we're just reconvening we just start finished some online public comment on item number 25 which is the oversized vehicle ordinance and we're going to get a summary on that and then we will go ahead and go into regular public comment and Elizabeth Smith go ahead please so just a brief summary of kind of what's in there and this is the highest of levels and as I mentioned it was a very meaty conversation and you guys I know that you'll dig into the comments after the meeting and those will also be shared with staff there are concerns that the ordinance criminalizes homelessness that was said in many different ways over all of the topics concerns that the cost of implementing the ordinance would be better spent on services and support sanitation services and support there are concerns from residents around the permitting requirements for visitors and the requirements being too restrictive in particular what do you do with your vehicle if you're a resident what do you do with your vehicle in the other hours that aren't the 72 hours that your permit works during the month concerns about the lack of recognition that vehicles are all that folks have if they're living in their vehicle it's the only thing that they have and that we need to be more mindful of that as we think of solutions in terms of permits similar similar comments that the parking limits for residents and visitors are too short and the 72 hour window is clear in terms of what do you do with your vehicle the rest of the time that the fees are counter productive for community security so this notion of destabilizing people more through fees and concerns about that and then there's concerns about the legal viability of the program when we as a city have not provided a level of affordable housing that would give people a place to go in terms of enforcement there's a notion that complaint driven maps or complaint driven heat maps are bad data it doesn't represent the full extent of the problem tickets and fees exacerbate the issues surrounding homelessness so if a person's already on the edge what happens when they get a fee or a fine others have said it's not about criminalizing poverty it's about managing lawlessness their call for enforcement around schools that this whole situation is the result of the city not managing criminal activity that we should be offering compassionate solutions versus enforcement and then what happens to the folks who lose their shelter when it is their place to live you'll see the comments trailing off in volume but hopefully I can summarize them on waste management there's a lot of comments on providing more service safe disposal locations a black water dump location and providing solutions not punishment so trash pickup and just relay those solutions to help mitigate the problems that we're seeing on the streets in terms of support services I can boil it down to two one we should take all this money that we're spending on the program and put it into our support services and then we'll have a lot of different sorts of ideas about what those support services could be and the case management should be a requirement and then just in terms of the other just in terms of the other comments there was some concerns about public engagement this process included and then focus on building more housing what role having a better understanding of what role RVs and oversized vehicles play for people who use them as their primary dwelling and making sure that we're thinking about that as we come forward with an ordinance and that is what I have to share with you right thank you Elizabeth it's super helpful okay we're gonna go ahead and bring this out to the public now and so if you are interested in commenting on an ordinance of the city item number 25 on our agenda today an ordinance of the city council the city of Santa Cruz amending title 10 and various chapters otherwise known as the oversized vehicle ordinance now is the time to press star nine on your phone to raise your hand but it is your time to speak you will hear an announcement that you have been unmuted the timer will then be set to one minute prior to that I'm gonna have four groups which I've proved for extra time go ahead and take their two minute slots and I'll start with Santa Cruz people over policing if they're ready to go and if you could yes can you hear me yes we can go for it okay we are Santa Cruz people over placing SC pop a group of local black Indigenous people of color dedicated to the safety and care of the most vulnerable in our community we want to emphasize that the OVO debate and the larger issue of houselessness in Santa Cruz is a racial justice issue houselessness and by extension poverty is effectively being criminalized in our city with police sent to conduct raids on encampments tow and impound the vehicles that houses people use for shelter etc this is an approach called crime prevention through environmental design that is rooted in the broken windows policing policies which are credited skyrocketing police violence harassment and surveillance of people of color in cities across the country this city council has repeatedly paid lip service to the idea of racial justice racism as a public health issue and black lives matter since the murder of George Floyd we have seen a lot of symbolic gestures in our town when it comes to actual concrete policy such as measures for addressing structural racism in our community no meaningful steps are taken and in fact Santa Cruz is becoming an increasingly hostile place for poor people of color thanks to things like the tolo and the OVO 2019 housing matters report shows that African-Americans make up 8% of the unhoused population but are less than 2% of the overall population in the previous discussion about the OVO at city council someone asked if parking and transportation had the role of ticketing and towing vehicles chief mill said in most cases yes but that since it wasn't being done the police took the initiative to do so why are we having police do an extra task that depletes our budget only to take away people's shelter with a huge fee for towing and impounding that money would be much better spent on supportive programs these programs could include provision of sanitation and waste disposal infrastructure increase safe parking programs until there is truly enough space for everyone who needs it vehicle repair and registration funds and construction of our transformation to more affordable housing units let's stop putting money towards hate and harm and start putting it towards compassion and care thank you thank you next up we have Santa Cruz Cares you could unmute yourself you can go ahead I ask you to take a moment to look at the state of homelessness in Santa Cruz today as it stands right now there are no low barrier emergency overnight shelters available the Benchlands are flooding other encampments have been torn down despite the storm this weekend the city did nothing to give people shelter where the safe sleeping sites that were promised with CSSO the cities are dragging its feet and real human beings are in danger making it more difficult for people to live in RVs when truly affordable housing is practically here is cruel where will people go vehicles are the last shelter option for many people removing this final barrier will create more unsheltered homelessness in our community right as we head towards winter the city is talking about setting up safe parking but even according to their own documentation will only be three emergency sites available the AFC safe parking program is in need of funding the city doesn't fund one dollar of that program and it's completely full yet it's brought up as if it's an option for anyone that needs somewhere to go for the night one particularly disturbing aspect of this ordinance is the narrow definition of who is a resident who can get a permit as it's written a resident includes only people who own property or can afford to pay rent you've erased houseless people from the definition of the Santa Cruz community I hope residents and business owners listening today understand that their own oversized trucks and trucks are the only ones that can afford to get a permit. And that's what the permit is permitting rules if wheels that families take on vacation will only be allowed to be parked on the street for a maximum of 12 days a month and that's with a permit that they'll have to pay for is this really what we want our city spending time on how much time money and energy will the city spend creating barriers to health that are when they're highly effective non punitive ways to handle nuisance behaviors that the city has to deal with. The city has to deal with these sanitation services with the expansion of public restrooms free and conveniently located Blackwater disposal and more refuse receptacles with frequent pick up do we want to actually solve problems that we want to make life more difficult for those struggling in hopes that they'll just leave there's a clear ethical choice here do the criminalizing aspects of this ordinance and uplift people with dignified rights. Thank you for taking us on Instagram. Thanks. Sorry about that next step will be stepping up Santa Cruz search. Good evening City Council. In politics across the country we see laws being passed which support one section of the population of the detriment of another from Texas's anti-abortion law to laws limiting voting rights. I believe that those pushing those laws are doing what they think is best to do and the best interest of any others is not important. But this is wrong. You're the City Council representing residents of our city. Any ordinance by you should be a balance treating all people fairly and compassionately to solve any issue coming before you. This ordinance only supports one set of constituents and leaves those living in their vehicles not causing any mass or disturbance without the freedom to live as they want for the support to the city. I believe that the City Council commission made a very clear 2016 statement and proposed programs do not answer that concern. Clearly written as mandated in the staff drafted can't be ordinance. It's also clearly absolute here. Why can we not admit that these of trauma domestic violence mental health and addiction do not will not and cannot act according to our expectations of proper behavior as a behaviorless by training. I believe that the City Council commission and the City Council commission will continue to run counter to the county's housing for health strategic plan of engagement, compassion and community. Why can we not use our state funding of $14 million to engage people in the streets to be part of the solution rather than treating them all as a problem. If people litter where there are no trash cans we put trash cans in more accessible communities. The city council has a broad range of public and public health sites for syringes other than just the three or four. The law is unjust if it criminalizes people who are innocent. Disordinates are far more about not wanting to see homeless people and it's about helping those most vulnerable in our community. And I'm ashamed. And last will be west side of the city. I'll try to track them down. I'll just hold two minutes if they do show up. We'll go ahead and go into public comment now. And we'll go ahead and set the timer for a minute each and we've got up to 60 minutes this evening. I see phone number ending in 7211 to start up. You press star 6. We'll try to get you going. Phone number ending in 7211. Go ahead. Can you hear me? Hi. Thank you. My name is Peter Cook. I strongly support this ordinance. I just want to tell you stories of a short amount of time. I have three kids. My 10 and 12 year old learn to bicycle by going down Swiss roadway. My 4 year old has never ridden that loop. The reason I can't take my kid around that loop is because the incredible amount of trash and litter there. There's constantly large vehicles parked there. People with loose, unleashed, scary dogs. We see human feces along the route. Crazy people screaming out at the road. There's large RVs, park lawn extension that make it so my kid has to ride in the middle of the road in the narrow sections. This area that used to be accessible to our entire community and now, not area, my wife feels safe jogging or that my family feels safe going. Not only that, our community has come together to donate a lot of money to have a pump track. The kids aren't safe biking there. It's really unacceptable. Thank you. Next I'll have Joseph Jacobs up. Please press star 6 to unmute yourself. Thank you very much. I appreciate everyone's efforts in working together to resolve this problem. I just wanted to point out that the city of Santa Barbara in fact did receive permission and approval from the coastal commission for its ordinance and its safe parking program 17 years ago. It continues to be the most successful model for safe parking. It's the original one and the best. I highly suggest that you visit their website. It's Santa Barbara New Beginnings Counseling Center runs it and it's a cooperative effort between the county of Santa Barbara, all of the supervisors are on board, the city, the entire city council, the mayor, law enforcement, the whole shebang. This is what this will take. It is 23 sites and 123 spaces. My concern about this ordinance is while it addresses oversized vehicles it's not really addressing the larger population of unhoused who are living in passenger cars. Thank you. Thank you. Next we have Colin Kayham and if you can press star six to unmute yourself please. Colin if you can press star six to unmute yourself please. Yes we can. So I am a Santa Cruz local and Cabrera college student and I am here to urge all of the city council members to vote no on this ordinance. I primarily believe that this ordinance directly targets our unhoused neighbors of Santa Cruz County many of which who are fighting complex fires many of which who live in oversized vehicles I live off of highway nine and growing up driving through Davenport seeing so many folks who have been just displaced by I'm sorry I'm a little nervous but I just want to say overall I urge all of you to vote no. I think there are so many better solutions that we can focus on that correctly focus on this issue focusing on our housing crisis and supporting low income housing in the community and so many other progressive actions that actually help tackle this issue I think this is just going to cause much much greater issues down the line and I urge all of you to vote no. Thank you. Thank you. Next I have Hollis Maloy. Hello. Can you hear me? Yes we can. Thank you for taking my call. I absolutely put my support in favor of the ban as a business owner in Santa Cruz and as a father of two young children I echo Peter Cook sentiment which is my kids are not safe on the streets of Santa Cruz my business and the clients that work there get objects thrown at them they're abused by verbal and audio insults here it has only gotten worse the fact that we have oversized vehicles on our streets for weeks at a time breaking laws while citizens don't get that same luxury is non-starter for me. I highly support this ban and I really encourage all of you to care about our streets and our safety of our kids and our community you will support this. Thank you very much. Thank you. Next up phone number Indian 074 press star 6 to unmute yourself please. Hello my name is Grace Castille I'm a student at UCSB and I work in the external affairs office I want that the UCSB student union assembly which is the official legitimate voice of the UCSB undergraduate student formally passed a resolution in opposition of the oversized vehicle ordinance that allows people living in Santa Cruz are directly impacted by this ordinance that does not address systemic issues such as lack of accessible and affordable housing, safe parking spaces, public restrooms, accessible trash cans and more basic needs we urge the city council to adopt compassionate solutions to remedy these issues which the oversized vehicle ordinance does not provide. Thank you. Thank you. Next I have Yes, thank you. My name is Kayla Kumar. I am a resident of the west side of Santa Cruz and I'm calling in to oppose the oversized vehicles ordinance this ordinance will result in the inequitable ticketing towing and loss of shelter for neighbors which is not only cruel it's impractical given the lack of shelter alternatives I want clean safe stable shelter for all my neighbors and also recognize that for some living in RVs is the only type of affordable housing they can secure pardon me instead of criminalizing poor people for not being able to afford housing and pitting housed people against them I'd like to encourage the council to drop the failed practice of criminalization and build off what works in this ordinance pardon me at being the low barrier so I've seen a nice registration of vehicle repair and methods of disposing sewage. Thank you. Thank you. Next I have Yeah, thank you. So I just wanted to echo comment that Shepard Calentary Johnson made earlier today which was we need to take a holistic view of what's needed in our community and we have diverse needs of people that require diverse solutions this ordinance is a sham it's nothing but political theater you know you can't enforce it in the most impacted areas such as Delaware until it's approved by the coastal commission there is zero evidence that the coastal commission will do so we have years of empirical evidence as to what are effective approaches to unchildured homelessness and ordinances aren't it the vast majority of problems which the supporters of this ordinance site can be better addressed with programs and services will have better outcomes and more people will be positively impacted especially the folks who are complaining about all of the problems that we see in our streets and want solutions to this problem are safe parking programs and more resources the solutions are more affordable housing and more housing for people in general thank you very much next up I have Yasmeen Nihal hello oh yeah you can't take things out without first putting things in its place so where are people in the oversized vehicle supposed to go for the next two months if this ordinance is approved this is a proposal that is going to be published by the city and I am going to go through the proposals you mentioned which leads to further hardship for them also I thought that council member Cummings made a good point you state a proposed safe parking program with a three tiered approach yet in the ordinance there is no language guaranteeing this it seems like a cop out to say that May versus shall was about location I urge you to be honest there is no guarantee spots 30 spots for safe parking are not enough I see in the safe parking program that there will be prioritization of certain demographics why not ensure the welfare of all people before you try to pass something like this because doing nothing is the least harm you could do passing the ordinance is going to actively cause harm it's like the Titanic where they prioritize women and children in the lifeboats that was only an issue because they were about to hit an iceberg this ordinance is the iceberg just don't pass it thank you please press star 6 unmute yourself we still can't hear you press star 6 any ideas I got a note from someone else that said they were speaking and we couldn't hear me we can come back to you okay we'll come back to you phone number ending in 1-810 can you hear me yes so we keep hearing that this issue this issue is complicated, that there's no magic bullet. And honestly, I just completely disagree. I don't think this issue is complicated. It's just a matter of whose interests are being prioritized by city council and city staff and whose aren't. When it comes to punishing poor people, it seems like city council and staff are willing to move mountains. When it seemed like the city would no longer be able to tow people's shelter away due to capacity issues, police chief Mills and city staff rapidly ramped up an ad hoc tow yard without presenting this to council, without presenting to the public and no analysis of cost. And with this ordinance, there seems to be no question about cost of legal challenges, cost of tow capacity, cost of police time and enforcing this ban. Meanwhile, city staff turns around and tells AFC, there is not a dime to spend supporting their safe parking program. There also seems to be no acknowledgement that just taking people's shelter away doesn't even address the impacts that makes their impacts worse. Because now you have people with no personal storage, no transportation and no shelter. Sorry about that. I have a phone number ending in 0249. This is Carol Paul Hamas calling in from Westside neighbors. I could hear you, but you couldn't hear me before. So I apologize. Thank you for granting us additional time. Westside neighbors are extremely concerned about problems related to oversize vehicle parking overnight on city streets. Members contact us with concerns about fire, garbage, sewage, environmental damage, drug dealing and domestic violence. One business owner reported finding someone dead in the vehicle adjacent to his business. Someone else called to see if they could figure out who to call about a toddler wandering alone around an RV that was on Mission Street. Other businesses report stolen dumpsters, locks broken, garbage jumped in them, stolen gas, et cetera. One business reported his street closed due to an RV dumping sewage in the storm drain necessitating the city flushing the storm drain. During COVID, our local businesses have already had a very difficult time and allowing overnight oversize vehicle parking has made it even harder for them. The city staff report documents well what lower Westside residents have known for years. The most impacted streets with the most vehicle abatement reports are on the lower Westside. The senior mobile home park in Delaware has been significantly impacted as have the residents in the apartments on Shaper and the students at PCS. Over a thousand people signed a petition last year to city staff to request that no overnight vehicle parking be permitted on city streets. Not everyone living in their vehicle creates problems, but the problems that have been created by some have reached an intolerable level. We support this ordinance as a first step in managing the situation that has simply become unmanageable. We support the idea of creating overnight safe parking services on county properties. We encourage the new city homeless services coordinator to engage with the county toward this goal. Allowing people to live in school or on city streets helps no one, not the neighbors and not the people living in their vehicles. Please pass this ordinance. Thank you. Thank you. Okay, next I have a phone number ending in 8297. Can people hear me? Yes, we can. I hope, lovely. Hi, my name is Benjamin Cook. I am a Santa Cruz resident and I include a voice to my strong opposition to these ordinance. Much like the total ordinance, it seems obvious to me that this is just another attempt by city council to shuffle around and criminalize and penalize our most vulnerable residents while placing a small bandaid on the problem such as sanitation and environmental concerns while actually fixing none of the problems and providing their resources. It is beyond me how West Side neighbors thought that the solution to finding someone dead in their car is to ticket and tow that car, but that's not approved to the side. This money should be going to legitimate services for unhoused people, not ticketing and toting and increasing the workload and budget for our police force. That's all. Thank you. Except I have phone number ending in seven, nine, seven, five. Here. Yes, we can. Hi, my name is Sarah Sampi Saban. I'm part of the student government at UCSC, but I'm also planning to live here for my foreseeable future. I've been so lucky to become antiquated with this community and to meet locals. One person I've met, someone really dear to me is a young woman who's recently diagnosed with breast cancer. And as she's going through chemotherapy and radioactive therapy, she is living in an RV currently. And it breaks my heart to know that this ordinance could affect her. She could be out on the street while she is being treated for breast cancer. It just seems unbelievably cruel to me. And the really horrible thing is I know she's not the only one with a person like this. So I'm urging you all to please vote no on this ordinance and to remember the humanity and the individual stories behind everyone who's affected by this. Thank you. Thank you. Next we have Sophie. I'm wondering, I'm strongly against this ordinance. And I do not understand how the council member who claimed that this is just bringing back recommendations and that they had been in contact with stakeholders and experts don't understand how that can be claimed when there have been just as many recommendations from the catch committee and experts which have not been brought into this. You do not have established safe parking programs. You have never funded current safe parking programs and you have never followed through on safe sleeping lots that you claimed would be part of the camping ordinance past months ago. So as it is, this is completely full and it is not possible for anyone who's currently living in their vehicle and parking in the streets to be enrolled in a safe sleeping program, which in this version of the ordinance is the only way they can receive an exception from the permit process, which leaves them their only option being to apply for the permit as a residence. And this ordinance conveniently defines a resident's own a resident only as someone who can own property or afford to pay rent. This is putting social apartheid into municipal code and attempting to segregate people living in poverty by removing them from the city of Santa Cruz. It's in violation of the coastal commission not to mention ethically. Thank you. Next up, I have Regina. Hey, I serve as the external vice president to the student union assembly at UC Santa Cruz, our student government on campus and I'm strongly opposed to this ordinance. It would displace so many students and exacerbate our housing crisis, which is known widely throughout the state as the worst housing crisis within the UC system despite the fact that we house over half our students on campus. This would only further the issues that students face with housing. Most of our students who are displaced from housing cannot afford to stay in a hotel like some other students. Our university is also running out of grants to provide to students who cannot afford to rent in Santa Cruz. So considering there have been no measures to control rent there shouldn't be any measures put in place to further displace students from their housing and worsen our housing crisis. Thank you. Thank you. Next, I have phone number ending in 1810. Okay, this is Garrett. Hey, my impression of RV squatters in Santa Cruz is they absolutely don't feel they are doing anything wrong and they can squat wherever they like, however they like, for as long as they like, although they're willing to play the move every 72 hours if they have to play that game, then move back. They take, but they give nothing in return except blight and a reason for the contributing public not to use the area around or those actual spaces for long periods of time. It's a similar story to the homelessness, but these are people with better options. Lieniency is at the root of an oversized population of both everywhere it occurs, like Santa Cruz, something the adoptive leaders and longers that have been calling in don't understand. We need a parking enforcement of this ordinance without tying it to providing free parking. I see some of the letters are the usual assortment of local, not or not, communist, socialist, leftist, adoptive, grievance, longers who object on their twisted ideological grounds and probably don't live near or experience what the proponents of this measure do. Okay, that's enough, bye. Next we have Joy S, please. Hello everybody. I am also a resident on the west side of Santa Cruz. So I think my voice matters in this. I echo all of the other calls against the OVO. If it's just a few people, this is a direct response to west side neighbors. If it's just a few people creating problems for everyone, why only help a fraction, maybe 10% and punish the rest? How about not just helping the most vulnerable, but building relationships with those few and engage in a restorative justice process along with support to make it easier for them to comply with the rules that we already have. This ordinance is not going to get the people with RVs that don't work. They don't have license or registration anymore. They have leaks or whatever. They're not eligible for safe parking programs. There need to be other interventions for that group of people that are not going to be in the top tier. Thanks. Thank you. Next I have phone number ending in 9663. A star six. Hi. Hi, can you hear you? Hi, my name is Erin Wood and I live on the west side and I'm part of showing up for racial justice in Santa Cruz County. And I just wanted to voice my opinion in solidarity with everyone who's against this ordinance. Yeah, especially what SC POP said, like brilliant. I agree with everything that everyone said was against it. And I just think we can do a lot better in such a wealthy city. And I think we can care for residents who are out there. Like there was that storm on Sunday night. Like, can you imagine being outside? Like even just in an RV, let alone like a tent. So I just wish that we would care a little bit more and criminalize a little bit less. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Anyone else want to speak on this item? In the audience, I'm not seeing any additional hands. A couple more just popped up. So phone number ending in 4931. Can you hear me? Yes, we can. Hello. Yes. Hey, this is Rachel Chavez. I'm calling in opposition of this ordinance. This policy is a blatant, blatant defiance of recommendations of the American Medical Association, the American Public Health Association, the United Nations Human Rights Council, the U.S. Entry Agency Council on Homelessness, as well as HUD and social scientists. All of these entities reject criminalizing homelessness in poverty because it's cruel and effective and incredibly expensive to taxpayers. This anti-science, anti-public health, anti-equity ordinance undermines the intentions of health and all policies and will increase on-sheltered homelessness while doing nothing to improve nuisance behaviors, all the while inflating a CPD's budget. It does not make littering or sewage jumping more legal nor offer actual solutions to these problems. It just creates a new way for police to target people purely based on income level and perceived quietness. Increasing sanitation service would be a better bet towards bridging the current inequitable service gap better the root cause of many of these complaints and does not require criminalization. At the last presentation of this ordinance, one council member may concern that we can get stuck into a loop of finding the plot, but nothing to a loop of not good enough. It is actually essential that we critically analyze policy and preventative laws in order to keep ourselves from creating new structural barriers to equity. Causing un-sheltered homelessness for even one person is not a minor flaw as it destabilizes and disrupts the event. Thank you. Next up is phone number ending in 4844. I'm a Robert Norris of Huff Posed Disordinates for many reasons, but I can't possibly wedge meaningful substantive and helpful specific comments into one minute, nor can any of the other individual speakers be expected to do so. I mean, why grovel before a mayor and council whose behavior shows such disregard if not contempt for public input? If you oppose this obscenity, simply file your appeal to the Coastal Commission. You may be successful as I was in 2016. In the meantime, directly challenge police harassment of those who's only home at their vehicle by direct determined civil resistance as we did in Riverside Drive. Remember, you can't argue reason to ideologues. Be it a police enforcement must be challenged when it appears in neighborhood. Don't wait, do it when you see it. Thank you. Thank you. Next up is phone number ending in 8346. Go ahead. I'd like to point out that the comments at this meeting are overwhelmingly against the ordinance. If you go forward with the ordinance, then I'm pretty sure we know who you're listening to in the community. I'm calling because I am a mother of two young kids and I live in a highly trafficked area that is populated by a lot of unhoused folks. And I'm really tired of hearing my other community members recognize their parenthood in order to criminalize people who are living in poverty. I want quiet safety in a clean environment too, but I want all of you to go ahead and do some research on what the criminalization of unhoused people and lack of adequate resources for those living in poverty actually does to communities. It exacerbates homelessness and all of the nuisance issues that comes with it, as you put it. If quote, quiet safety in a clean environment is what you want, voting yes on this ordinance is like shooting yourself in the foot. As for my kids, they will grow up understanding the inequities that put human beings on the street to begin with, i.e. empathy. And as for me, I fear raising my children in a world where politicians selectively engage their constituents and participate in inhumane and discriminatory practices exponentially more than I fear people living in poverty. Thank you. Next, I have a phone number ending at 8512. Bonnie, how are we doing on time? We started out there. Hello, my name is Michael and I've been in the city for over 30 years. The city has had six years of research and study and transparency and commentaries. So please pass this ordinance now. There's no need for any further delays. There are at least 46 cities in California, including 16 coastal cities that already have ordinances. These cities include Carlsbad, Delmar, Eureka, Hatham Bay, Hermosa Beach, Huntington Beach, Laguna Beach, Long Beach, Marina, Redondo Beach, San Diego, San Luis Obispo, San Mateo, Santa Barbara, Santa Monica, and Ventura. Just like these other 16 coastal cities have already passed these ordinances without coastal commission approval. That's a red herring. So please pass this ordinance. Most of these RV dwellers have come here from elsewhere because we are so permissive and they will leave for more permissive cities once the ordinance gets started, starts getting strongly enforced here. So please pass this ordinance. You owe it to the safe neighbors in our city. Thank you. Thank you. Next I've got Katie Spencer. Hi, my name is Katie. I live in Santa Cruz and I strongly oppose the oversized vehicle ordinance. As many callers have stated already, we could be spending resources on creating safer, cleaner, and healthier living conditions for unhoused neighbors through trash removal and safe free water disposal. Instead, this ordinance will spend money on ticketing, towing, and punishing people for apparently not using trash disposal resources that do not exist. But TOLO and CSSO and now the oversized vehicle ordinance. The government seems focused on simply not seeing houselessness rather than working to end houselessness and the housing crisis in Santa Cruz once and for all. Please vote no on this ordinance. Thank you. Next we've got Leanna. So my name is Leanna Felde. I work in homeless services in Santa Cruz and I strongly oppose this ordinance. The best practice solution for ending homelessness across the nation is housing first. That's been a proven best practice. That is what will effectively get our quote unquote nuisance community members off of the streets is giving them housing, affordable housing for everybody in Santa Cruz. So as long as there is no rental control and not proper services available to all of our community members in Santa Cruz, I strongly oppose this ordinance and believe that everybody regardless of social class has a right to live in Santa Cruz. Thank you. Thank you. Okay, we'll bring this back to the council now for deliberation. And I see council member Golder and council member commentary Johnson have their hands. Council member Golder, I'll call you first. Thank you. So I do appreciate all the public engagement this evening and everyone's comments. I'd also like to acknowledge that we got over a thousand emails in favor of this ordinance in close to 50 opposed. So although some of someone mentioned that the comments this evening were overwhelmingly in favor, I think that might have just been from the people that attended this evening's meeting. So I'm open to hearing if my colleagues have other comments but I'm happy to move the recommendation in the report. I would like to make one modification in that families with children should be prioritized in all three tiers based on what my colleague council member Walkins said earlier this evening. I think that that's a really important addition that we had overlooked and it's super important. So that's where I am at right now. Okay. And that would show up in the tier language. Yeah. So I can email that language over to Bonnie. So we have a part of the staff recommendation, right? Exactly. Yeah. Just adding the families are prioritized. Yeah. Okay. I'll put it up. Okay. I have a motion by council member Golder to go with the basically the staff, the agenda report recommendation and with the clarification about prioritization for families with children. And I believe I saw council members. Calentari Johnson was the next hand up. Thank you, mayor. And I will second that motion and I want to just make some comments. I really appreciate everyone who called in and everyone who sent letters and emailed and who had phone conversations and met one-on-one and met in group settings with me and other council members over the last month. I know that we can all acknowledge that addressing this issue is very challenging and I know we're not alone. I think communities across our nation are faced with this and we won't be able to solve it with one action and one program and we can't be paralyzed. We need to move forward and we need to be in action and we need to take a multi approach. This ordinance is actually enforcing existing law. There's law that's already in the box. It's enforcing existing law and setting forward a services approach. And it's unfortunate that some members who are posted don't see the work that's gone into bringing forward a tiered approach. And I know that members of the community don't get updates around how we're moving forward with some of our previous commitments but we are moving forward. We're working with the county partners. We're working with nonprofit partners and safe sleeping sites will be up and running. There's a lot of work that goes into it. This is the most that we've done in terms of our city and putting, moving forward with services in a very long time. We responded during COVID in partnership with the county but prior to that we hadn't done much and we've been able to move a services approach in the last year or more so than we have in probably the last decade. And there's a limitation to what we can do. I know that because I've worked with the county and I've worked with the city. There's a limitation in terms of role, in terms of scope, in terms of capacity. And yet it is our responsibility as a city to commit, to commit to supporting those who are vulnerable and need support. So I see this as a step forward. I see the three tiered approach as a beginning. It's not everything that we need and want but it's a beginning. And the ordinance determines time, place and manner and addresses egregious and illegal behaviors and it moves us forward with a services approach. And in terms of having it in the ordinance or not there needs to be flexibility in how we develop our programming. We've come to that conclusion as we talk to service providers and talk to faith community members, talk to folks from other communities who are implementing safe parking programs. We need to have the flexibility to adjust and pivot and respond to the needs. So that's why it's important to have this as a policy direction. So I think with that, I'll leave it to my colleagues to comment. Thank you. And you did second the motion, correct? That's correct. Your turn. Got it. Okay. I will go ahead and call on council member Brown and then council member Cummings. Thank you, mayor. I just have a few just really quick comments here. I'm not gonna support this. I've said many a time all of the reasons why I have spoken to specifics of kind of this approach in different forms as they have come up over the years. So I'm just not gonna take the time it clearly isn't gonna be much value here to this deliberation. But I will say that I'm not supporting it both for ethical reasons, but also really for really pragmatic and practical reasons. I don't believe that just simply writing an ordinance with all kinds of open-ended questions about whether or not it can even be operationalized due to resources, legality, and other issues that have come up. I don't believe that's action. That's writing an ordinance. And without knowing how it would be enforced where the resources would come from, how we can actually stand up some of these service programming, kind of meeting those needs with none of that clarified for me. I just don't see action coming out of this aside from the possibility of perhaps more RVs being towed and people losing their homes. I'm sorry, I just don't see it. And I would urge all of you to think about what kind of impact you wanna have and to try to think through how this would be operationalized. Perhaps you know things I don't know about the city's capacity, but I'm just hard pressed to be able to think about this as action right now. I understand it's responding to a particularly vocal set of concerns. So, I mean, I guess I'll just leave it there. I hope that we can begin to really have a conversation that incorporates, for example, I've been getting messages and it's been raised here, where are the catch recommendations? And that certain communities of interest, organizations, particular groups haven't been included in the conversation. And I'm not saying this because I wanna attack or critique my colleagues here. I am talking about this as when we're actually gonna do something that affects a whole lot of people's lives, we want to have broad input. So, this is not about saying that what you've done is lacking, this is about saying we have a lot more to do. And I'm not hearing an acknowledgement that that is the case. And so, I just don't have a lot of confidence that using this as the mechanism to move the conversation forward is going to be productive. I look forward to continuing conversations. I hope my colleagues who were really immersed in this and very supportive of this look to identifying ways to develop some evaluations of what we're doing to develop some evaluation metrics of their own about what is actually being accomplished through this. And I won't provide that direction here because I don't think that I'm not something that I'll get support for at this moment, but I'm gonna keep pushing on that as we move forward. And I do wanna say I support looking at supportive services, looking at safe parking programs, looking at the kinds of things we're talking about around the CSSO, which still have not materialized, again, notably about the people who are trying to make this happen. It just isn't, it's hard. And so, I do wanna continue that conversation. And I'd like to, for the record say, I absolutely support it and I appreciate that that's a piece of the conversation that has not been included in the past. And I hope we can expand upon that and kind of think a little bit more outside the box because we're gonna have to, we need to get creative and we need to figure out how to actually take action based upon the action that you've asked us to take tonight. I'm just gonna go to Bonnie Bush real quick. Bonnie, do you have a clarification or question? Yeah, before we get too far, I just wanna make sure that this. I believe that was Council Member Golder's addition. Does that look? Yeah, I think it's great. And then maybe just after prioritized, it could say at all three tiers, just. Okay. All in all three tiers? At all. All on or at, either way is fine with. Thank you, Bonnie. Council Member Cummings. Well, if like Council Member Golder might have had something to. I'm sorry, go ahead. Council Member Golder. Oh, I was just thinking also of independent children. So any circumstance with children. So I don't know how to articulate that, but how, you know. I'll work on that one. Thank you. But yeah, it's a child on our own too. Then, or, you know. Yeah, maybe like homeless youth. You mean like minor people under age? Any circumstance where there's a minor or homeless youth or transition age youth, like being prioritized. The standard terminology is unaccompanied minor. Okay. Thank you, Sandy. Council Member Cummings. Thank you, Mayor. So I'm just going to put my comments out there so we can wrap things up. But I, you know, I too am concerned with the negative impacts on community experiences that sometimes can be linked to homelessness and RV camping. And I appreciate the work that's been done on the item before us this evening. I've been discussing this item with diverse groups of community members. And there are a number of concerns that I share with the community members, which are around largely fiscal impact, enforcement, service provision, and some of the unintended consequences that will negatively impact the health and safety of residents. Just to kind of talk about a few of these points, because I don't want to go into, you know, there's a bunch, but I just want to highlight some of the, the major points that came up. It appears that the ordinance will likely be appealed to the Coastal Commission due to the similar issues that we see from the ordinance that was moved forward in 2016. Another point was that it's not clear what organizations will be running the safe parking programs and the cost. It's not clear what the fiscal impact will be on the city to provide enforcement, vehicle storage, case and program management and funding for these programs. It's not clear how much the permits would cost. And one very large concern that's come up in the conversations that I've had is that this ordinance will likely have negative impacts on people experiencing homelessness that are not negatively impacting our community. And so I'm 100% in agreement with trying to address issues and behaviors that negatively impact our community. And that should be the priority of, you know, what we're trying to work with because that's much different than going after vehicles of a specific size and homeless people. And so I'll just point out too, that I know a number of people who live in their cars who work and pay taxes in our community, they don't, they're not negatively impacting the environments around them. And this morning, I just actually spoke with a county worker who lives in his van, works with our homeless services programs and they were concerned about why the city's trying to criminalize someone who works and pays taxes and is really trying to help support homeless services in our community who can't, well, he recently became homeless and had to move into his van. And so, you know, this is something that these are real stories that I'm hearing. And, you know, I would feel, I don't feel comfortable, you know, knowing that I could pass something that could actually criminalize someone I know and other individuals in this community who are really working and paying taxes and trying to be good citizens. So, you know, in addition to this, if the council's gonna move forward with this ordinance, I would just encourage them to be doing and developing the services in coordination with the county so that we can identify funding and ensure confidence within the community that we're actually gonna be able to provide the services that we've outlined in this ordinance. And while I appreciate the intent for the reasons I've stated above and in support of the many emails and communications I've received, I can't support this ordinance as currently written and we'll be voting no this evening. I'm happy to work with members of our council, members of the community on trying to figure out ways we can address the negative impacts that we're experiencing, but I can't support an ordinance that targets the size of a vehicle someone lives in. I support safe parking. Some of the things that have been outlined in this ordinance are great. I support safe parking. I support some of the ideas around creating permits. And I support all the support of services and things that we could do, but before committing the city to this, I also want to understand, and I think the community would like to understand how much this is gonna cost, where the funding's gonna come from and what are the exact services that we're gonna provide so that we can make the supportive services side of this of reality. So I will end my comments there and thank you for allowing me the time to speak. And I want to thank everybody for showing up this evening too. Thank you, council member. Council member Watkins. Yeah, thank you mayor. And yeah, I too want to thank those who emailed us and reached out to us who are attending our meeting this evening and sharing their play. I want to also thank council member Golder for incorporating the language around prioritizing youth and families and really thinking about how we're taking care of that vulnerable population. You know, every time we have these meetings as we address these, this difficult topic, I always just, I really struggle with it because it's so hard and it's so complicated and there's so many elements to factor in. I think that I've seen us, I'm willing to do anything out of perfection for a perfect policy and willing to accept status quo because it's hard to say yes to some potential pollution. And I've seen extreme measures sort of presented and supported community outrage and then repealed. And I think where I land based on probably my background in public policy is how do we move forward with something that's in some way that is going to make a difference because by doing nothing, we're saying that's okay. And that's a policy choice. We're basically saying that we're willing to accept that by going sort of the opposite direction and not necessarily having a thoughtful approach. We're also saying, we'll just do something revolutionary and that usually results in kind of a pushback which we've seen in the past as well. And so I find myself usually just trying to say, gosh, how do we keep in action and move in some way that is hopefully going to mitigate some of the impacts environmentally and socially except accompanied with some of these experiences that we're having in our community. And so for me, I feel comfortable given where we are. I appreciate the work that's gone into this with the council members. I think as I've said before, we're trying to keep moving in a direction where we're able to have some sort of policy recommendation. Yes, it's not perfect. Frankly, we won't see anything perfect until we see state and federal intervention. I really don't think so. It's just that complicated and it requires that level of intervention. Absent that, absolutely continuing to work with our county, absolutely continuing to work with our nonprofit community and anyone else who wants to be part of the solution. Doing the best we can to implement supportive services and lead with programming, learn, scale up what works and stop what doesn't work, but ultimately continue to try to seek solutions that work for our community. And so, I think, I know that it's imperfect and I wish we did have perfect, but absolutely perfect. I'm not willing to accept status quo or not do anything. And over the past four years, I feel like I've seen a lot of conversation without a lot of action and a lot of really polarizing dialogue, which ultimately I say, I think every single person who spoke tonight actually really shares a very, very common belief and value in that we really want to seek solutions and see people healthy and see Santa Cruz thriving. And if we start from that place and we try to find compromise that we can all live with, I think we can move forward with solutions that will improve Santa Cruz. And I think for me, this isn't what we had proposed before by prior councils that had sort of kind of opened it up, no real kind of thought around designing the ordinance. This is incremental and it leads with solutions in regards to the different programming. It's wonderful, we want more programming within the realm that we have a possibility for. Lastly, I would say we do need to think about how we're increasing our revenue and we need to think about how we're increasing our resources to be able to address some of these issues. And that includes having revenue measures come before our voters. And we didn't have that opportunity to have a revenue measure come before our voters. So for me, I think also what this requires is resourcing and prioritization and we need more resources. So when the time comes that we are presented with different revenue measures, remember that that is what can go to supporting a lot of these priorities that we wanna see accomplished. And we continue the dialogues and we continue how we wanna move forward the prioritization process, but having resources to do so only furthers our common goal to support solutions in regards to homelessness in our community. Thank you, council member. I'm gonna cue myself in here real quick too. I am gonna support the ordinance tonight. And I sit here as a council member that actually has brought $14 million for homelessness to the city of Santa Cruz. And I've done that because I believe that we are failing the people who are homeless in our community. We talk a lot about helping homeless people. The people I know who are helping homeless people, they're over at the Housing Matters campus. They're raising millions of dollars. They're going to build permanent supportive housing. They're raising money from our community. They're following federal and state guidelines. They're also actually creating a pipeline for an individual to succeed and move themselves out of the situation they're in and hopefully into a more stable life. And there's other programs that are doing that too. Downtown streets team, homeless garden project, 99% placement into employment. Once you come out of homeless garden project. So we have people doing the work in this community and they do it well and they're held as a national standard. What we have to do is stop pointing at each other and we have to resource what we have, which is an extreme issue in the city. Our city is probably the most impacted city of its size in the state of California, if not in most of the Western States. The only way that we're going to get there is to tell our story to our elected leaders in the state, to our federal leaders. I have met with all of those multiple times over this year, multiple times as I've been on city council. Their job is to help us resource what we need to do as a community. And they know that and I know that and we all know that. That's why we have the system of federal, state and local government. Unless we can express the kinds of things that we're working on in a policy arena, even if they're not perfect to my colleague's point just now but their progress, they're responding to our community concerns, then that progress as seen as a way, it's a first step, it's a way to engage, it's a way to get resources to Santa Cruz. So, this is money that has never been come just to the city of Santa Cruz. We will be partnering with the county and with our state senator and our state assembly member to really understand how to deploy these funds. These funds will go towards infrastructure, they'll go towards services. Safe sleeping sites, we're not something that people discussed even just a year ago. These are the kinds of policy objectives that are coming forward that recognize that we don't want to criminalize people but we do need to provide a variety of services and spaces for people to go to and be in while we make the contact, while we do the case management, while we do the outreach, while we do the medical care that people need. So this idea that we are doing nothing or we're just sort of hand waving, I just disagree with because I've seen the programmatic outcomes being built slow but sure they're happening. I also believe it's my job to compliment those to do whatever I can do to bring resources to the city to continue to do this. The city for the first time is really going to step up and provide more comprehensive approach to what we're gonna be doing, guided by things like the cash, guided by things that advise from other cities. So I just want the public that may be watching for folks to understand we are bringing the resource. Our public also answered a poll earlier this year. 78% of our voters were ready to invest in homeless services. They were ready to tax themselves and to get going. And we've had to delay that and we're gonna have to delay it probably for two years. So the resource could have been initiated as soon as in the next six months. We'll wait, we'll get it done. We're gonna bring those resources to the people who need it the most here in the city of San Cruz. And we'll do that in partnership with the county. Our voters want us to fix this problem. They want us to be compassionate. They want us to be active. They don't want to hear us start just keep talking, talking, talking. So let's do what the voters would have had us do. Let's start figuring out both the policy, the objectives, the kinds of facilities and the kinds of investment we need to do. If we don't do that, we will just throw money down a drain because we don't have objectives if we don't have policy. So I'll be supporting this tonight. It's a, it's a spoke in the wheel, but there's a lot of other spokes. This past week, you know, I know our staff worked like crazy also on moving ahead, hopefully another 300, you know, an existing 300 units of affordable housing that we hope will hit the streets soon. We are working day and night, our staff works day and night with on two objectives. Number one is always housing, always housing. Number two is getting and helping our local businesses recover from COVID. So I just want our public to know that we are a very active and capable staff and leadership. And we're lucky to serve with those folks that work in our city, because when we try to accomplish our goals, they're there to help us, but we do have to set policy. It is our job. That is what we would like we need to do. And we need to help with those prioritization and setting that policy. So I want the public to know that we are not in dire straits. We have been, we had got the largest investment in the state of California, at least in the last fiscal year, one of the largest in the state. So the state's ready to engage. The state wants to support us. We need to deliver. We need to provide the framework by which we're going to improve people's lives. So I'll end on that and I'll just again say that I support this ordinance. It's a building block. And if we don't start building something, people will just continue to suffer in Santa Cruz. And that's not fair to them. And it's not fair to our community as a whole. We could do better and we should be doing better, but talking, talking, talking is not working. So let's do something. And this is one of those building blocks. I'll call on council member, call on Tari Johnson and then council member Golder. Thank you, Mayor Myers. Well, you just took us to the big picture level and articulated it really well. And I do want to thank you for increasing our resources around this issue. And I do also want to thank the service providers in our community who work day in and day out on this issue. I just very briefly, you took us up here. I wanted to just quickly address one piece that I think we didn't articulate earlier about this framework. And I'd like to invite Lee Butler as well is that we have integrated in here a process by which individuals who are engaged with the city and have expressed interest in finding safe parking and alternative shelter would not have consequences and they would be allowed to temporarily remain on city streets. So that's a piece that I think we didn't articulate before. You know, there's been a lot of concern around criminalization, really, really the misdemeanor pieces and what's in there is around illegal behavior. And that would always stand because the safety of our community and the safety of individuals in our community is important. But there's a process that we've integrated into this framework. And I think we didn't articulate that well. So I wanted to invite Lee Butler to just share a little bit. Sure, thanks, Council Member Calantari-Johnson. I would put you to section 10.40.120G7 is a new section. And I'll read it first and then speak to it a little bit. So under G, it says that the prohibitions contained in subsection A shall not apply to any of the following. And it has a list of various ones done at number seven. It says a person and oversized vehicle that are collectively participating in a safe parking program or other safe sleeping or transitional shelter program operated or sanctioned by the city but do not have access to a safe parking space or other shelter options under such programs due to lack of capacity. This was one that the committee and staff and our attorneys spent a lot of time going back and forth on and how to word this. And this does provide an opportunity for individuals who are participating in such programs to avoid a parking ticket. And the specifics of how that will roll out are gonna be handled through a provision that is later on down in that same section but subsection P where it specifies that the city manager is authorized to promulgate and publish rules and regulations to interpret and implement this section. So as we're developing these programs if we're finding that their capacity issues, this would allow for some opportunities to allow for parking of oversized vehicles on streets even if there isn't capacity within those programs. Thank you. I appreciate you providing the details of that. So just to kind of bring it back, again, Mayor Myers articulated really well that we need to move forward. This is the first step and it's maybe imperfect but it's a step in the right direction and there are things happening. There are things happening with staff and county and service providers that not everyone on council knows all the details of. I don't know all the details of but it's moving. So I'll just end with that. Thank you. Council Member Golder and then Vice Mayor Brunner and then Council Member Cummings. I didn't see that Vice Mayor raised her hand. That's actually why I raised my hand because I just wanted to say for members of the public that the three of us have been working so closely together for the last three days we spent all day Sunday. We didn't even see the storm. We were locked in with no windows and then all last night till 11 o'clock at night where I was literally ready to crawl onto the table and take a nap. And we really made an effort to make sure everyone's voice was heard. And so I raised my hand to hear what Council Member Brunner had to say. And I just have to say too, I really appreciate all my colleagues even those who are not agreeing with me tonight who are there to represent a voice in the community and that's why I raised my hand. I wanted to hear what Council Member Brunner wanted to say. Okay, feed up. Vice Mayor, you've got the floor. Thank you. Thank you, Council Member Golder. This has been really great to hear from everybody and to hear the called in public comments to hear from my colleagues. I think there's a couple of things that I just wanted to really emphasize. There seems to be a huge concern about not criminalizing folks. And that is definitely a concern that led us down the path of offering the programmatic aspect of the safe parking and the three tiers and working and speaking with County Health and Human Services and kind of bouncing ideas on the services part. And I think I just wanna take it back one more step in that even to this day, I still speak with people and they don't realize that the City of Santa Cruz is a municipality, right? What are our departments? They don't include the social services. We don't have a department for that. We have fire, we have water, we have police, we have HR and we rely on other partners. We contract out, we partner up. We ask for our needs with the County that houses all the social services and human, the human services and health department on all variety of needed services in our city and countywide, frankly, but what our city is facing is not just homelessness, there's mental health, behavioral health, substance abuse and all of that is not any department in the city. So I just wanted to emphasize that piece of it that shows that we're really making steps forward to acknowledge that those services are needed. We have people and even earlier in the presentation for re-envision and some of the earlier conversations, we know that for those on-house, there are steps and there are different populations of on-house folks that all have different needs and require different services and solutions, we're fully aware of that and we're fully aware of the shelter, the interim housing, the need to go into whatever option is needed, whether it's permanent supportive housing or this re-housing wave, affordable housing, low-income housing, there's that need and those services we need to start finding out ways that we can contribute to those services as a municipality and a lot of that does require funding and it requires staff capacity and so in this, I do wanna say there seems to be a perception of ticket and towing and that is a piece of it that even exists without this under California vehicle codes, right? There are laws in place regarding 72-hour parking and things like that where a vehicle can be ticketed and towed and so this is one part of creating guidelines around how vehicles are parked and again, that piece of services woven in with enforcement is the piece that really speaks here in this situation moving forward and there was a lot of talk about this is a first step or a first step or this is one way to move forward and that first step is really, identifying safe places for people to go and that does, if anybody read through the agenda report and the ordinance, that does include sanitation, that does include refuse, black water, dumping and all of those necessary services that are needed at different levels and that is the biggest cost. If you look at the tier three, that robust program, safe parking program would be the highest cost to the city and where that is, who operates it and the funding to pay for that is still being discussed, being looked at, being advocated for, being worked through and there are many discussions with partners on what are some ways that we can have the funding to, we would love to just have a tier three. I think that speaks to a lot of the calls for concern of making sure that there are services connected to this. So I'll wrap up but a couple of notes that I took, you know, just in this process, I know that I have and certainly the other council members, we've really learned a lot of information. Many people, some of the callers also talked about other cities and thank you to our legal staff for providing a lot of information about some of the other cities in the state that have policy and program together to create communities that are supported, the people who are unhoused, the neighborhoods, the environment, there has to be a together balance and while the long-term goals for subsidized and permanent housing, supportive housing are necessary components of public policy and affordable housing. It has to be supplemented with some short-term objectives of creating, you know, we have, for example, RV campgrounds throughout the county and there was even research done into that. What if you can't afford that? But technically those are places that provide a space for you to park, dumping, trash, restrooms and there's guidelines. There's guidelines and rules to follow there. You can't, you know, it can't be a free-for-all. So applying that same kind of concept in this to safe parking lots and spaces where people can be and feel safe and have the necessary provisions that are needed so they don't have to dump in our sewer system and have those environmental impacts and be connected to outreach or whatever services that particular individual, person, family, senior, veteran needs because all those needs are varied and we hope to get to a point of that connection, right? So I just, I wanted to just clarify that ticket and towing and costs for ticket and towing when, you know, the main costs and obstacles to get to for us are the services side and the programming side to be able to offer those. Towing comes last, like that's the last part of it. So I hope that's clear and... Thank you, Vice Mayor. Yeah. I think we're probably ready. I think everyone spoke. Maybe we're ready for the vote. Council Member Cummings, you said you were going to lodge a no vote. Did you, do we need to have any more conversation? I had a question that came up earlier that I forgot to ask and I was going to see if I could ask the planning director before we moved on. Okay, sure. I just wanted to follow up on the 72 hour sleeping, the immediate shelter program. Is that, so we prepared to go online with that this evening and another thing is that I know that before. So I thought it was already at the police station. I thought that was something that was ongoing and so I'm just wondering if you could speak to that briefly. Sure, my understanding based on comments that I've heard from the police department is that there are not vehicles there right now. There have been in the past, but at this point in time, they are not there. And I'm not sure if Chief Mills or Interim Chief Escalante are available to comment on that. Go ahead Chief. Yes, thank you. Thank you, Mayor. Yes, nobody is currently using the facility at the police department, but yes, we did open it up and had a maximum of two oversized vehicles that were using our from parking lot in the past. Currently there is not and not for any apparent reason that it was associated with the program that was running in. So we weren't running it ourselves, we just offered the lot. Thanks. So I guess getting back to the question, I'm just wondering if we could just provide some information on to the community on where this immediate site will be, who's going to be running it and how people can get in touch with it. Cause it sounds like that's direction that this is going in tonight. And so if we're, you know, part of the direction is that we're going to have a safe sleeping site go online immediately for oversized vehicles up to three. I'm just wondering if we could provide some information to the community on where that's going to be. So that if somebody this evening wants to go there, they know who the contact, they know where to go. Council member Cummings, this is the first reading. So this won't become, this is, we won't, this, we have to go through and then it has another 30 days to cure. So this is three months, you know, at least 60, probably 60 days out. I guess that's, that's part of the confusion I was asking earlier about the safe sleeping part of the motion versus the ordinance because it sounded like those were two separate things. That one was direction to go work on the safe sleeping programs. The other was the introduction of the ordinance. There's some combination of the two, but there's the not completely combined. And that the way that I was reading this was that part of these safe sleeping programs, that's something that counts that staff is going to immediately start working on. And one of those provisions was to immediately set up and implement an emergency overnight safe parking program. So I'm asking these questions because the way that I interpreted this was that that was gonna be something that would happen after the action tonight. And I was hoping that if that's the case, we get information out to people where they can go so that they have somewhere to safely sleep. I think I will turn this over to Rosemary. I'm not sure the intent is that we're gonna be having the safe sleeping site opening tonight. I mean, there is the Association of Faith-Based Charities, but clarify if you would Rosemary or staff. Right, so I think that you're correct that the idea that this is a package of things that would go forward and the work is ongoing. I think that the ordinance would have to go forward to second reading and then 30 day process. In the interim, if we get that organized, especially the three nights, we can certainly let people know that that's happening, but I don't think we're prepared to say here's where to go tonight because there are some things that are working out that will continue to work out. Leigh, do you have anything to add to that? I would just add that as soon as we have information, I'd be happy to get that information posted online so that the community's aware. I just, I guess. Okay, why don't we, okay. Okay, then why don't we go ahead, Bonnie, with the roll call vote. It is, the motion is to go with the staff recommendation with the additions for clarifying families and children and unaccompanied minors should be prioritized. And why don't we go with the roll call? And that motion was by Council Member Golder, seconded by Council Member Kong, Tari Johnson. And we'll go with the roll call vote, please. Really quick, I just wanna share my screen. I confirmed with Council Member Golder that I removed these down here just because it seemed redundant because we were adding it up here, all three tiers. So the red is the addition and the crossed out red on C is removed. Okay. Council Member Golder, are you comfortable with that in the second? Not perfect, that's exactly what I was intending. Okay. Yeah, thank you. Okay, great. We'll go with the roll call vote then. Council Member Watkins. Aye. Council Member Johnson. No, and for the record, I'm just really concerned with some of the implementation that we're expressing here, though I'm completely on board with safe sleeping and trying to mitigate and navigate impacts from oversize vehicles, but no. I'd like to put that on record as well if it's going in the minutes. Thank you. Vice Mayor Bruder. Mayor Meyers. Aye. That motion passes five in favor and two against. And that will, we will adjourn our meeting. Council will be adjourning back into closed session now. Bonnie, how long will you need to get us set up in there? Give me just 30 seconds. Okay, I'll let you know. Thanks. Thank you everyone for joining us.