 All right, it says good afternoon on my script, but it's good morning. So good morning, welcome to our 10.45 a.m., public portion of closed litigation session of the March 12, 2019 meeting of the Santa Cruz City Council. In this part of the meeting, the council will receive public testimony. Thereafter, the council members will move to the courtyard conference room for the closed session. I would like to ask our clerk to please call the roll. Thank you, Mayor. Council members, Cron. Here. Leverett. Here. Meyers is currently absent. Brown. Here. Matthews. Here. Vice Mayor Cummings. Here. And Mayor Watkins. Here. At this time, I'd like to see if there are any members of the public who would like to speak to any of the items listed on closed session. If you could, please come up to my left and we'll have two minutes. Good morning, council. My name is Ted Rosseter, and like you, I'm a representative of others. As an SEIU bargaining team member, I have to think about all the 400 or 455 people that I'm standing here for. Admin staff, city clerk, finance, HR, IT, library staff, PD rangers, records and property, parks and rec, sanitation, garbage truck drivers, landfill workers, maintenance workers, street maintenance workers, parking office, parking enforcement, water treatment, water distribution, water meter shop, wastewater treatment plant, corp yard, public works, and many more that I'm sure I'm forgetting. You know the people who are the lowest paid in the city, that's SEIU. We're often overlooked, undervalued, and underappreciated. These are the people that are feeling the squeeze the most. I'm here for the employees who've got to work a second or even a third job while being a full-time city employee. I'm here for the people who are homeless or nearly homeless working for the city. I'm here for the people who come to work with broken bones because they can't afford to go unpaid because of an accident outside of work that will take weeks or months to heal working for the city. I'm here for everyone who's given more than the job requires. The people who know that they make the city of Santa Cruz more than just another city, they give it a heart and a soul, making it a community. I'm here to tell you that your community is hurting. It needs you now. It needs you to tell the city, the bargaining team, that we're losing time, money, experience, morale, good people, and opportunities. Tell them to help us now. Give us what we need, what we've asked for. We're looking for your leadership to them to help us make a deal. Thank you. Thank you. My name's Ken Bear. I've worked for the city of Santa Cruz for 14 years now, lived in Santa Cruz for 49. While working here, I've seen employees time and again take pay cuts, pay a portion of the city's contribution to CalPERS, and taken furloughs to help the city through tough times. When times are good, the city, we don't fully regain what we've given up. This dysfunctional relationship has driven some of my coworkers from their homes. It started with the lower paid part-time employees that had to give up other work because management's demands for city worker to come first and give... Sorry, I'm not very good at public speaking. The dysfunctional relationship has driven some of my coworkers from their homes. It started with the lower paid part-time workers that had to give up other work because management demands city work comes first without giving any security in the form of regular hours. They did this because they thought sometime in the future, the city would do the right thing. I will continue on, but I want you to think about this. Is this the city council that will finally do the right thing by the lower paid city workers? As you can imagine, it can be quite embarrassing for a person that doesn't have a home to talk about it in public, and that's why he's not here today. For the first time since working here, I work with a full-time employee that is living in their car. He and his dog try not to infringe on the public. He maintains his vehicle and makes sure he doesn't spend too much time in one spot. He does have a choice. He can continue living out of his car or he can rent a garden shed. That's all they can afford. Thank you. I want to invite you to feel free to submit your remarks if you'd like, and we could take them back to closed session if you'd like. Thank you. Hello, my name is Renee Belling. I've worked for the city for 30 years. I'm a library employee, and I've been on the bargaining team for several times. Three years ago during bargaining with the city, we once again tried to get SEIU 521 service workers to be able to pay the same as management for parking downtown. When the city absolutely refused to do that, we said that it was only fair for everyone to pay the same price for parking downtown. We were called hypocrites since we get back $10 a month for parking from a special fund. Now management pays $39 a month for the city annual park anywhere permit. That's a total of $468 a year. They receive a 200 monthly car allowance for a total of 2,400 a year. Most make upwards of $150,000 and some over $200,000. City employees are paying $45 this year for a total of $540, and it only applies to whichever parking garage they have the permit for. Next year, it will be $55 a month for a total of $660. $65 a month in 2021 for a total of $780 a year, and in 2022 it will be $75 a month for a total of 900. Most city employees who are paying this amount makes $40,000 or less a year net. The city is now giving downtown parking businesses free parking for their employees, giving downtown businesses free parking for their employees, and for contractors who are working with the city. The city also makes contractors who work with the city pay their employees the city's living wage. That also applies to any business with employees that are located in the city of Santa Cruz, because it is so expensive to live in Santa Cruz. The city refuses to pay their own employees that same living wage, and they make those employees that don't make that living wage pay full price for parking downtown. Somehow, I don't think we're the hypocrites. And you're welcome also if you weren't able to complete. Thank you, and I'll ask if you could, please, if you will, lower your signs so folks behind you can see. Thank you, okay. Morning Mayor Watkins, council members. My name is Neil Christen. I am a city employee and I'm on the negotiating team. I'm here today to speak on behalf of my service employee colleagues and to respectfully request your collective leadership and authorizing your negotiating team to move beyond the limitations of the current city proposal. Although we recognize and commend the improvement in both the initial offer and negotiating conditions, unfortunately, the current city proposal once again does not make any firm commitment to close the now quantified and significant wage gap. The current proposal would barely cover the projected increase in inflation and would not immediately address the most pressing issues that impact our colleagues. The looming wage gap, a recruitment and retention crisis in conjunction with the rapidly increasing cost of living in our area. In reference to the significance of the growing wage gap, your lead negotiator accurately acknowledged that it took multiple contracts over many years to arrive at this current arrangement. And as I agree, I urgently ask you to adopt a position of prioritizing the investment in your most valuable asset, your employees. I am asking you to move to break a long cycle of suboptimal contracts and a distasteful history of service employees fighting to make up for major concessions that were given up when the city experienced a fiscal crisis during the recession. Over the past few years, we have seen economics conditions improve, steady increases in the city's unrestricted fund, and a sustained high rate of discretionary spending. Your service employees now ask that you prioritize a long overdue fiscal commitment to your employees and the important services they provide to our community. We, your service employees are passionate in the commitment to the scope of our current proposal and that it begins to address the growing wage gap. Recruitment and retention crisis and the rising costs of living, which collectively and adversely impact our professional and personal lives and inevitably the services that we provide. Our members remain committed to continue to fight, to earn a contract that immediately sets us on a path of economic recovery. Thank you. Thank you. Morning council, my name is John Silas. I am also on the city's, on the SEIU's bargaining team. Two weeks ago, I assisted with suppressing a fire that broke out in the encampment behind Ross. A fire that started in a homeless individual's tent that was destroying everything that that man possessed in the world. My fellow Rangers, police officers, and I approached the fire, unknown what combustibles were inside or around the tent and began to evacuate others. We struggled to save as much as we could while the fire department was in route. We risked our health, well-being, and lives to do everything we could to help this man. It didn't matter that he was homeless. We sacrificed our own safety to help a member of this community. Last week, again, while at the Ross camp, I observed a vehicle collision that resulted in a vehicle immediately bursting into flames. I ran through that camp with my fire extinguisher, not knowing if anyone was still in the vehicle. I, again, without hesitation, put my well-being and safety on the side to save life and property, to suppress that vehicle fire. I love this community and everyone in it, housed or houseless, wealthy or poor. I'm a service employee and I'm one of the many that helps keep the city clean, running, and safe. Sadly, reflecting back on these recent events, instead of the pride I should have felt as the fire battalion chief placed a junior firefighter sticker on my Ranger jacket, I wondered if anyone in the city management would even care if I took a position in Paul Otto or San Jose, like so many of my colleagues before me did. Or if I'm just a number that is replaceable. And I'm sad to say that many of your service workers feel this way, that the city continually looks at us as replaceable. As we struggle to make ends meet, one unexpected financial strain away from catastrophe. We are forced out of the city's workforce in this community to seek outside employment because we are not paid competitively and at a livable wage. It's time to retain your skilled trained workforce. I plead that the council show leadership and authorize a fair contract today. We are ready to get this deal done, and I hope the council is as well. Thank you. Mayor and city council, I'm here on behalf of my wife, who is at a class right now, but she filed a police report on a hit and run while she was at a exercise class over by the old roller rink on Seabright Avenue. And she went in and did her exercise, came out and her vehicle, which was parked on Seabright Street, had been hit, sideswiped, and there were scratches and dents in both the front driver side door and the passenger side door, and the mirror was all pushed back and dislocated. So Susan spent 30 years teaching and we put two kids through college and we did everything that we could to contribute to this community. And all I'm asking is that you consider the report when you go in the closed session and think about it. And I know these folks back here have really legitimate concerns, but when you consider this, just think about the fact that she worked hard all her life and for the first time in her life at 72 years old, she bought her first new car. And while it meant a lot to her, I just hope that you'll consider that case. So thank you very much. And if you have any questions or want clarification, I can answer those, but I don't know if that's appropriate here. So thank you. All right. I don't believe we have any other additional public comments. So at this time, I will adjourn the meeting to the courtyard conference room where the council will go into its closed session. I just have an announcement. The two anticipated litigation items on your closed session agenda under item C relate to one, the Verizon encroachment permit that was on your February 26th agenda. That was an encroachment permit for a design permit that was approved by the city. And that was out on Morrissey Boulevard. The second significant exposure to litigation item relates to the homeless encampment behind the Ross building. Thank you. I city attorney Condard. Just a point of order. Tony, why are you announcing those now and why weren't they in the agenda previous? I mean, we're in public session now so they could have been here. I'm doing it for the minutes to just affirm that we have complied with the Brown Act with respect to significant exposure to litigation items. Brown Act requires that there be an announcement. If the circumstances are known or a threat of litigation has been made. Because folks who might have wanted to speak on this may have come and they saw it in our agenda earlier. So, okay. At this time we'll adjourn to our courtyard conference room. All right. Well, good afternoon everybody. Welcome to our 1 30 PM session of the March 12th, 2019 meeting of the city council. I'll go ahead and ask that our clerk please call the roll. Thank you mayor. Council member is Cron. Here. Clever. Here. Myers. Here. Brown. Here. Matthews is currently absent. Vice mayor Cummings. Here. And Mayor Watkins. Here. And we'll go ahead and lead us to the Pledge of Allegiance. Pledge of Allegiance. The floor is yours to stand. The nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. So now is the time for the introduction of new employees. If we could please have our public works director, Mark Dettel, introduce his new employee. Good afternoon, Mayor and Council. It's my pleasure to introduce my new employee, Traiu Ari Niko Ballisterio. How'd I do, okay? Very well. All right. He's a new facility maintenance assistant, working in our parking division. He was born in Los Angeles and his family, and he moved up to Santa Cruz when he was very young. So he's lived here most of his life. Currently lives downtown. He lives in town with his family and his dog. He's a little dog called, well, not little. He's got a dog named Hachi. He's worked downtown for, in the downtown 7-11 for about 10 years, doing the night shift clerk. So familiar with our downtown area. He held a night shift job, many part-time, full-time positions throughout Santa Cruz and beyond. So we're very happy to have him in the parking facilities group. He attended Santa Cruz Community Schools, and he wanted to give a special shout out to his teacher, Gary Sarge Fitzgibbon. Fitzgibbon. It's given. When he's not working, what he does for fun, he likes to go camping. He's got a camper, and he goes to national parks, does photography, and likes to capture the memories with his ventures with him and his dog. So please join me in welcoming Trey Yu to our team. Okay, so we could now invite Lee Butler to introduce his new employees. Good afternoon, Mayor and Council Member. Today, I'm very pleased to introduce to you Kimberly Dory. She joined us as a code enforcement specialist, and she was born and raised in Sacramento, California. She received her bachelor's degree in criminal justice from California State University, Chico. Prior to joining the city, she worked for three and a half years with the County of Sacramento as a code enforcement and rental housing inspector, and she's got a series of certifications and courses that she's taken at the basic intermediate and advanced level through the California Association of Code Enforcement Officers. So her background and experience aligned her well with our needs here in the department. And in her spare time, she is passionate about helping animals, and she enjoys volunteering at her local shelters. So please join me in welcoming Kimberly. Welcome. Welcome, Kimberly. All I said, Mark Dettle, our Director of Public Works, come up for a 40-year service pin recognition. What one of the privileges of having this job is you occasionally you get to recognize long-term employees and 40 years is a long time. I want you to think about it. Um, my hats off to Luis Escobar. He started with the city, March 12th, 1979, 40 years ago today, through a work experience program administered through Santa Cruz High. He worked in the parking division where he worked on the parking meters for school credit. In fact, he told me before the meeting, he worked in the basement right over here. That used to be connected to PD, and that's where he worked on the parking meters. When he was still in high school, he then became a service maintenance worker in the courtyard garage, working the swing shift from 4 p.m. to midnight. I don't think we can do that anymore, but we're the high school student, but back then the rules were different, I guess. His responsibility was filling up the refuse trucks and other fleet vehicles with gasoline and checking the fluid levels. He was then promoted to a service maintenance worker two, where he serviced the vehicles and then hired as an equipment maintenance, excuse me, equipment mechanic one, and later promoted to equipment mechanic two, leading to another promotion in 1995 as his current position as lead mechanic. In 40 years, I'm sure you've seen a lot of changes in the type of equipment and what we do, but it's one of our employees that just keeps getting the work done and keeps our vehicles on the road, and my hat's off to you for all that dedication, and I have a ceremony, the pin with actually a nice diamond in it, it looks like a diamond for 40 years to congratulate you. Thank you. It's been a long journey. I have seen a lot of changes, a lot of people come and go, but I'm fortunate that I was able to be here this long, but anyways, thank you. Thank you. Thank you for all your years of service. So at this time, I'd like to have a moment for Mayor's Proclamation honoring Carol Scourge's retirement, and if we could please ask Tony Elliott, our director of Parks and Rec to come on up, along with Carol, there she is. Good afternoon, Mayor and City Council, Tony Elliott, Parks and Recreation Director. In March 1987, I was eagerly anticipating my fourth birthday, I was really excited, and at that same time, at that same time, it gets better, it gets better, it gets better. It gets better. At that same time, Carol Scourge began really her first steps in her career and what would become a legacy here with Santa Cruz Parks and Recreation. As you all know, Carol recently announced her retirement, will be March 22nd of this year, after a remarkable and impactful tenure with the city of Santa Cruz. Carol started as Recreation Superintendent and has spent 32 years dedicating her energy, knowledge and passion to serve the residents of Santa Cruz. During her tenure, she's overseen many of the most iconic events in the city, ranging from Clam Chowder to Woody's at the Wharf, Junior Guards, a number of events and activities that really kind of define traditions here in the city. Carol served as the city's liaison through sister cities and is really a consummate and spirited advocate in all ways for the city of Santa Cruz. In 1989, after the earthquake, she served on the streetscape project on Pacific Avenue Mall. Over time has helped develop new parks, facilities such as Depot Park. In 2018, she served as the interim director of Parks and Recreation. And I think Carol may be best known for her energy, her competitiveness, her spirit of inclusion, just kind of that fire that true Rec professionals have. But really, her impact goes far beyond the walls of City Hall and the walls of the Parks and Recreation Department. And it's really reflected in her service to the community through programs, through events, and through her service through boards and different activities through the community as well. So Carol's personality, her passion for recreation are really undeniable and her legacy will live far beyond her days reporting to the office. So on behalf of the entire Santa Cruz Parks and Recreation team, it's my honor with everybody back here from the Parks and Rec crew to honor, to thank and acknowledge Carol Scourage for her 32 years of service to Santa Cruz Parks and Recreation. Thank you. So I really would like everyone to sit down and really get comfortable. Yeah. If you need to get water, please feel free to do that. The restrooms are outside the door because I am going to take this opportunity in all sincerity. First off, I really feel it's really unfair that Louise got up here before me. I feel like a slouch at 32 years. Like, and he got a diamond. And if I would have known that, I would have done eight more years. I'm telling you, I would have. But I guess it's too late. Tony's already signed the PAF. So that's the way it goes. But really, it kind of seems like yesterday that I, the Donetsch YouMaker, brought me up here to honor my 25 years. And now here it's 32. And so I just really want to take the opportunity to thank the council members over the years. They've just been really awesome and supportive and really helped mentor me along and provided me guidance and support. People that have been here for a long time, been on the council many times. People that have been on the commission. I just appreciate so much. I appreciate Martine who helped me through the interim time and of course all through the years of his guidance and support. I appreciate that so much. And really thanks so much all the different people and all the departments throughout the city. I just have had such great, wonderful working relationships and people have been such a team and it's really been my honor to work with so many people throughout the city organization. And probably then most of all, I really want to thank the Parks and Recreation team who are absolutely awesome and has been such a pleasure to work with them. Hardworking, like many city employees, but they really put their time, passion and effort into it and have really been such a help and support to me and to the whole department over the years. They couldn't be here today but I just really wanted to thank my sons and my 97 year old father who will be here on the 28th and if you don't have that on your calendar you better put it on there because that's when we're really gonna have fun and really celebrate. But I'd like to thank them for my sons for going to so many events over the years for so many dedications and being there with a smile and going along with it. And I can always remember bringing my youngest to a historical preservation commission because I didn't have childcare and he's going under the benches and things are going on and the architect's up talking and he said, who's making all that? Oh, it's my son, Joey. He's so cute. He'll be fine, don't worry about him. But anyway, thank you for this honor. I appreciate it so much. It's been my pleasure to serve the city. It's always been an honor and it's really just, it's nice to walk away and think of all the great things that have been accomplished over the years through our department and then also to know that there'll be 32 and more years ahead of great things that will happen for the city and the Parks and Recreation Department. Thank you for this honor. I appreciate it very much. You're not done yet, Carol. Sorry. Dean? You can talk about you now. I just, you know, it's my honor to be mayor at this time when you're retiring so I'm able to sign your proclamation. I've been on the council for two years and you have always approached me incredibly open as I know you probably have to every council member and interested in coming up with solutions and have been 100% committed to our city. And that has never been questioned. You could see that through and through. I want to thank you so much for your years of work. It's been an honor to get to know you over these past few years and it's my honor to have the proclamation in your name and honor. So I'll read a few and then I'm sure other council members may want to say a few words. And there's a couple I want to point out. So whereas over the course of Carol Scourge is 32 years with the Parks and Recreation Department, she has delivered an unparalleled spirit of dedicated service to the community and an unwavering sense of competitiveness and endless supply of positive energy and a character that never ceases to encourage, involve, challenge and bring out the best in all people around her. And I now therefore, Martin Watkins, the mayor of City of Santa Cruz, do hereby proclaim March 12th, 2019, as Carol Scourge Day in the City of Santa Cruz. And I encourage all citizens and co-workers to join me in expressing our heartfelt appreciation for you, Carol, your work, your 32 years of dedicated service and exemplary service and numerous contribution to the Parks and Recreation Department and to the City of Santa Cruz and we're wishing you're very best in retirement. Thank you, Mayor Watkins. And if there's any council members who want to say a few words. Carol, turn around. We're still not done with you yet, Carol. Carol, I just wanted to recognize you specifically. I was chair of the Parks and Rec Commission during your interim director period. And I just want to thank you. I know that was a really heavy lift. And just in general, just thank you for all your years of service. I think I've known you for at least 20 plus years. I'll miss seeing you walking down to West Cliff and doing your afternoon walk. But I also want to thank you for your help in helping to save the Santa Cruz Museum of Natural History, which is another dear project of mine. We almost closed our doors and it was because of your help with the city staff to help us not only renovate the building in very important ways, but also just work together as partners to keep that really important institution that provides environmental education for 10,000 kids. Every year. So I really appreciate your work on that as well as a member of the board of the Natural History Museum. So thanks and have fun. I would also like to just say personally to Carol, I think I first interacted with you when you staffed the vision Santa Cruz. And my gosh, that was, what a big project early in your career to work on that, but recovering from the earthquake. And then there's nothing in Santa Cruz that you haven't touched in the P&R department. I think of the sister cities, the beach programs, all the stuff at Harvey West. I mean, all the leagues, the corporations. I look at that Parks and Rec catalog that comes out. What is it three times a year now? And you think, what the city delivers in terms of facilities and programs that enrich the lives of everyone here? And I know you've touched all of it and that we are all in your debt for that. Thank you. Thank you, Carol. Thank you so much. Just want to say really today, one day, Carol Scourge Day. Woody's on the wharf. How many of those have we had? I thought those were Carol Scourge Days. I thought the clam chatter cookoff was Carol Scourge Day. I really thought every day I took my daughters to the park. It was Carol Scourge Day. Thank you, Carol. Thank you, Carol. Okay, let's see if we can get some more. I just want to say, yeah, I just echo the comments of my colleagues. Your commitment, your passion for our city and our Parks and Rec programs is clear. And I would just add that your passion is also contagious in the workplace. So beyond the array of programs that you have been involved with and responsible for overseeing and saving in some cases, you know, just being around you, we feel it. And so I just really want to appreciate that and wish you well in your retirement and hope to keep seeing you around. Thank you, Carol. Yeah, I'm gonna go now. Okay, you can go now. You can go. So we have another opportunity to honor a retirement today. So we have the Small Business Development Center Activities Mayor's Proclamation honoring Theresa Tome's retirement. So please come on up. And, thank you. She would be promoting her programs. I didn't know I was getting the proclamation. That's why you have a promotional piece. Thank you. Surprise. Hi. Mayor Watkins and counsel, I just, it was my intent to come here today to thank you for your support of the Small Business Development Center over the years. Ever since Bonnie Lipscomb came on as your Economic Development Director previously redevelopment, she immediately reached out to me and being familiar with the SBDC from her previous employment. We entered into a partnership for which I am so grateful. We rely heavily on your support to provide match to the federal dollars we receive from the SBA. And I really, truly could not do what we do without your support. I brought this piece to show you our county-wide statistics for 2018 that we served over 350 clients. We helped those clients increase their sales by $15 million. So that's a, I'm proud of your city's investment in that increase in tax and other revenue for the city. We helped our clients get over $5 million in loans and we also presented 34 seminars and did some special programs like the retail reset, which you'll see on one side. And some of the businesses we served under that program which I developed last year were included because of your funding. So your funding went into direct services to help restaurants and retailers work out some challenges and increase their sales last year and I included one narrative of a success story from Humble Sea Brewery, but we do have many. So I just want to say thank you so much to Bonnie and her staff, Rebecca Unit, Amanda Rotella and Marty Ackerman and others who've just been really great supporters. Because of that, we've been able to hold seminars continually at the library and thanks to the library staff as well. They've been great. And just now we just presented my last seminar but the second of this year's Brown Bag series and now we're having them at Next Space. So we're calling them Tuesday Tech Talks, quick as I love alliteration. And we had a full house and again, the city sponsorship is always noted on all the flyers and the PowerPoints and I just, I come to you most sincerely with my thanks. I have a great team of advisors including Keith Holtoway who I just saw sneak into the room with my rearview mirror and Keith is instrumental in helping all of your businesses succeed. It's still challenging. It's a challenging environment for small business and we need to continue to support them. And my office will continue to work with the local lenders to make sure that they have the capital that they need to start and to grow. And my successor will be here before you shortly, I'm sure, and he's going to be great. His name is Brandon Napoli and he knows the area well. His father was actually the tennis coach up at UCSC. So he loves Santa Cruz and it was his dream to as he put it come home. So I'm really happy and really confident that things will keep going well, especially with your support. So thank you for this surprise proclamation, I think. And, but mostly it's just really been my honor to work with all of you over the years. Thank you. Well, thank you so much for the presentation and for allowing us to honor you in your retirement. Thank you. And today, in addition to the work that you do in supporting our cities, I know you do a lot of work in supporting education as well. And most recently saw you at the, Your Future's Our Business Luncheon and getting the next generation of future business owners engaged as well. So I appreciate all your work in that regard too. I'll just read a couple if I may. So whereas under Theresa Tome's leadership, over $8 million of funding is received annually by SBDC clients in the community. And SBDC was named Organization of the Year in 2005 by the Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce. Theresa Tome was named a community hero for 2003 by United Way, recently awarded the Star of California SBDC program at the nationwide SBDC conference and has been honored not once but twice as Woman of the Year by the Aptos Chamber of Commerce in 2016 and then by the Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce for her impactful leadership and years of support to the Santa Cruz County businesses. So it's my honor as Mayor of the City of Santa Cruz to hear by proclaim March 12th as Theresa Tome Day to share with Carol Scourge Day and encourage all of our participants and our citizens and business owners in expressing our heartfelt appreciation for your years of service and exemplary leadership and contributions to our community. So thank you so much. Thank you. My next step, I'll be going to Italy for a while and I think I'm gonna stop into Cestri Lavante and say hi to all of our sister city ears. So that concludes our presentations this afternoon. I have a few announcements and then we'll go right into our meeting. So today's meeting is broadcasted live on community television channel 25 and streaming on the city's website at cityofsantaacruz.com. Lynn Dunn is our technician for both this afternoon and evening session and I wanna thank him for his work. He's here longer than we are. All city council members can be emailed at citycouncilatcityofsantaacruz.com and if you'd like to communicate with us about an agenda item, we'd like to receive your email by Monday at 5 p.m. before our council meeting and this provides us with an opportunity to review your email and include it with the rest of our agenda packet. Please do bear in mind that all items of correspondence with the city and the city council constitutes public records and are generally subject to disclosure upon request by any member of the public. Accordingly, if you have sensitive or private information that you do not wish to be made public, you should not include that information in your correspondence. Our rules of decorum are on the window ledge to my left and it's my job to keep the meeting running without disruption and I ask that you respect your fellow citizens when you are inside and outside of the council chambers. So at this time, I'd like to ask if there are any council members with a statement of disqualification today. Okay, seeing none. And are there any additions or deletions to our agenda today? I'll just briefly make an announcement about oral communications. Oral communications is an opportunity for members of the community to speak with us about items that are not on our agenda. And oral communications will occur at or around 7 p.m. in the evening. I'll turn it over to our city attorney to report on the session. Thank you, Mayor Watkins. Members of the city council. Four categories of closed session discussion this afternoon, or this morning rather, that occurred in the courtyard conference room. Item A was liability claims, the claim of Susan Tomley-Shallenberger. That is also an item on this afternoon's consent agenda. Item eight. Second, item B was a conference with labor negotiators. The conference met with its chief negotiators concerning all bargaining groups, SEIU Local 521, OE-3, supervisors and mid managers, and fire management association. There was no reportable action on that item. There were two items of significant exposure to litigation. Item one, concerned exposure to litigation in connection with the Ross encampment out by the Gateway Plaza. That is also an open session discussion for this evening. Second item was threatened litigation by Verizon in connection with the encroachment permit matter that was on your February 26th agenda. On that item, council directed that the encroachment permit issue be agendized for further consideration at the next regular meeting on March 26th. Lastly, there was a conference with legal counsel on existing litigation, and that was the Hatch-Pomerance versus City of Santa Cruz case. Council received a report from legal counsel. There was no reportable action on that item. Thank you. All right, now I'll ask that our city manager provide us with a report. Yes, thank you. I wanted to just give a brief update on the rental housing task force and the work that the Consensus and Collaboration Program at Sacramento State University is doing for the city in this regard. So first, Dave Seppos from CCP, as are known, is conducting background research and has thus far interviewed in person all council members to get initial understanding of their perspectives or your perspectives on rental housing issues and tenant landlord relations and your goals for the proposed stakeholder group. There's some minor follow-up that's required with a few council members on topics that could not be finished during their initial discussions. Secondly, Mr. Seppos has asked for feedback from each council member on community stakeholders who he may interview as a means to hear from a broad cross-section of the community with diverse perspectives. He is compiling this list from the council member's responses and from his own background research. Third, as he's neutral with associated autonomy to do his work, CCP will choose an interview up to 20 interviews based on recommendations collected and best professional judgment. Following community member interviews, Mr. Seppos will prepare a report that outlines the assessment process, including interview participants, questions and timeframe, findings from the interviews, analysis of the findings and recommendations about a task force, including potentially a recommendation that the task force not be convened. If Mr. Seppos recommends a task force to be convened, he will provide recommendations on the proposed design for the process, including but not limited to methods to select and convene the group roles and rules for members, selected official staff and consultants and public engagement suggestions as well. So that's where we're at with that process. I'm gonna be happy to answer any questions with respect to that. Do any council members have questions on that? Vice Mayor Cummings. Did Dave Seppos provide a timeline for when he's expecting to come back with any recommendations? There is a timeframe in the proposal lead, do you have it off the top of your head? I'll speed. So there is a timeframe in the overall proposal. I think part of it is gonna depend on how quickly he can convene and get a hold of all of those stakeholders, arranging 20 separate interviews and then pulling everything together. I don't know what ended up off the top of my head, the specific timeframe for the overall process. We were tossing around two months or so as a possibility and somewhere in that timeframe, I think is what we would be looking at. We can at our next update provide you the specific timeframe, which will be more accurate at that point just because some of those interviews, hopefully we'll have had an opportunity to be scheduled. Thank you. Any other questions from Kyle? Okay, thank you. Okay, so at this time we'll move along to our consent agenda. And these are items four through 13 on the agenda. All items will be acted upon in one motion unless an item is pulled by a council member for further discussion. So are there any council members who'd like to pull an item at this time for further discussion? Council member Brown. I like to pull item six and 11. Are there any council members who have additional items to pull or comments? I would like to pull item seven and nine. Additional, okay. Are there any council members who wish to comment on any items other than item six, seven, nine or 11? Is there any member of the public who would like to request an item be pulled or to speak to any item on our consent agenda with exception to the items that have been pulled, which are items six, seven, nine and 11. Now would be the time to do so. All right, then I'll entertain a motion for the remainder. I'll move the consent agenda. I'll second it. Motion by council member Brown, seconded by council member Myers. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? That passes unanimously. Okay, we'll go ahead and move right along to our first pulled item, which is item number six and council member Brown. So I believe there are members of the public who would like to speak on this item, which is part of the reason that I pulled it. And so I think I'd like to hear from them before I make a couple of statements about where we're at. Please come and we'll be given two minutes. Good afternoon, mayor and city council, Bruce Van Allen from Santa Cruz. As I told you last time, a previous council agreed to funding a tenant legal services program in the amount of $15,000 about a year and a half ago. It didn't come together right away, partly due to finding the right non-profit sponsor and things like that. But the main obstacle was really that getting enough legal advice time in that budget turned out to be very challenging. And so we are actually asking for the release of the original $15,000. The group now has its insurance and non-profit sponsor and everything and ready to go. And we would like to get an additional $15,000 for this pilot project so that we can pay serious attorney time if it's needed. We just found when we did scenarios with attorneys about intaking people with issues and then how they are filtered down to where the attorney actually has to get involved. We discovered that we would have very little time, actual attorney time ready. We could hand them leaflets and, you know, you know your rights types of literature, but that wouldn't really suffice in a contentious situation. So we would like to request the additional $15,000 as well. Thank you very much. Yeah. Hi, Cynthia Berger with Santa Cruz Tenants Association. What this program would offer is education for landlord's tenants and non-landlord tenant people about landlord tenant laws and rights. We wouldn't be lawyers because we don't have enough money to hire a lawyer, but I've had a hotline for five years. Got over 1,000 calls and I do know, you know, and Job Hershfield also, you know, we've taught a lot of know your rights classes. I've gotten many calls from landlords over the years. So I've provided free assistance to landlords about their rights. Oh, my voice is all shaky. And so I understand that there's been some communications from people who are concerned because possibly some of the folks who worked on measure and would be involved in this, but I have a proven track record. I've had no complaints. I've had no lawsuits in the past five years and many landlords have consulted me and I've helped them to learn their rights. So that's a large part of what a program without a lawyer does. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Hi, my name is Jessica Tweet at Ingersoll. I was brought on originally to be the part-time project coordinator for Tenant Sanctuary. I've been doing a lot of the legwork trying to get up and running with the initial funding that were granted. What we budgeted with the initial 15,000 is enough to get us started with the office space and our materials as well as phone, internet and money for a part-time project coordinator and a part-time attorney. But we're finding that with the changing nature of rental housing laws in the last few years, a lot of tenants are left misinformed and we're very much aware of the gap in legal aid between tenants and landlords. So our initial 15,000 could cover maybe four hours a week of a lawyer, not to represent tenants, but to do advising to our counselors. We believe that an additional 15,000 could help us fund a more regular and meaningful president of a lawyer to guide our volunteers, especially with this rental housing task force and the potential for more change to rental housing laws. Again, I just wanna say it's kind of astonishing the lack of legal aid we have for tenants and Santa Cruz and we would just like to start the conversation about healing that gap with the bridge. We're mostly a volunteer-based program, but we do believe advice from a certified tenant lawyer could make a difference in our program. So thank you. Darius Mohsenine, I'm a landlord in town. I think I represent a lot of the other landlords based on some of the communication we've had on social media. I would say nearly the vast majority of not all landlords in this town are absolutely for some organization to provide as a tenant ombudsman. Many of you probably know how many times I've been before, right here at this podium over the past several years, advocating for echo housing or a project sentinel, very mature, very established organizations with a large footprint across multiple cities in the Bay Area. Yes, this was approved last year, but that was pre-toxic Measure M campaign. And what we've learned in a year is just the very principles as part of this organization are the same ones that are labeling us landlords as white supremacists and greedy and even with images of a guillotine that chop our heads off on social media. It's a bad look for the city to now fund that same group. And if you have the 15K, give it to CRLA, Rural Legal, Senior Legal, they're already doing these services. I'm sure they could possibly use the money. But, and then in addition, we also have this task force that's convening. And there's no urgency for this services with this group of folks given their background and their track record in so far as waiting and see what the recommendation is from the task force as far as a viable, effective tenant rights and landlords as well. And let me just say, if they're sincere about inclusion, I don't see any landlords on their roster or part of their organization. So again, I just ask you to table this, wait for perhaps a recommendation from the task force when that comes or consider funding existing organizations, CRLA, Senior Legal, to provide these same kinds of services. And I might not, thank you. Thank you, thank you. Are there any other members of the public who would like to address the council on this item? Seeing none, we'll go ahead and return it back for action and deliberation. Council Member Brown? And then Council Member Matt? So I just want to make a couple of brief comments. First with respect to the concern about the recipient, the proposed recipient of this appropriation. It's also true that yes, we approved this long ago for this group, but I think it's also worth noting that at the time we did do a request for proposals, we cast a wide net, we asked all of the usual suspects about their interest in performing these services. Some of them did not really have the capacity, others are restricted due to their own policies around their operations, primarily through the, CRLA through the federal government, restricted on who they can and cannot serve. And so this was widely agreed to within the community as the best way forward for such a program at the time. It was a unanimous support by this council. So with that, I would just say, and a recognition that the budget is in question in terms of the services that can be provided, I would like to move that we amend the fiscal year 2019 budget to include this appropriation and increase it to $30,000 for tenant legal services with the caveat that we're defining this as time limited and subject to revision based on task force, stakeholder recommendations and evidence of effectiveness if we do decide on future funding allocations for future budget years. Second that. Okay, so that's a motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Vice Mayor Cummings. Councilor Mathews, did you? Yeah, I did support and continue to support the idea of some funding for tenant legal services. This funding was approved in 2017, I believe not for this particular group, but for this function. And since then, there's been some big gaps in time. Obviously, the 2018 year politically created a changed landscape. I'm looking at the March 2018 description of the program for tenants and some of that now seems outdated. And I also saw, to my mind, kind of a lack of clarity of what kind of choices would have to be made. It was a very modest budget. I looked at that 15,000 and thought, boy, for all the things that are spelled out in this program, that doesn't do it. So I did have a lot of questions. It wasn't clear who the new fiscal sponsor was. So, and I could go through a lot of things where I thought this proposal just needs serious work at the very least. Are the parties mentioned, whom I know, to be employees? Are they the advisory board, et cetera? There was a lot that just simply wasn't clear in this. There's a talk about providing professional quality legal services. And then another part it talks about, we're unable to give legal advice, we only give information, et cetera, so just a clarity on what's to be expected from the service and to what extent there are agreements in place with some of the other entities mentioned as potential legal partners, senior legal, CRLA, maybe other volunteer attorneys. And again, admittedly, there was only one response to the initial request for proposals, we know that there are other established organizations regionally that do provide a range of tenant services. And I am concerned again with the heavy weighting in terms of the description of services and advisory group that doesn't include any representation of landlord or housing operator experience. So I would be much more comfortable. And then again, I just raised a question, I don't know what the motion is intended, but the 15,000 was only for a 24 month period. And what's been put out to us is that's not enough to do the work. So is it intended that the 30,000 would be for a, I said 24 month, 24 week, that it would be 30,000 for a 24 week period again. So doubling the amount, but still only for half a year. So there's just a lot that's unclear. And when I compare this with some of the applications we get for community programs or something like that, it's much more explicit what's the range of services to be provided. So for that reason, I would at the very least want to support putting this on hold and asking that it be brought back for significant updating and refinement. And that's at the very least. And I think another preference would be to re-advertise to again, a broader circle and see what comes forward in terms of others who might be interested. But I can't support the motion as it's expressed right today for all the reasons that I've put forth. No supercruiting. I support the motion on the floor. I just wanted to clarify a question that was asked about CRLA and why they did not bid on this or are they already too busy or? We have Casey Heemard actually, she, if you. Thank you. Casey Heemard from the city manager's office. We never heard from CRLA about why they did not apply but I understand that they are not able to represent undocumented members of our community. So. Thank you. Council member Chase at the time and myself, she was mayor, mayor Chase and myself sat in a room with the directing attorney from CRLA who at that time told us they were not able to bid because of this constraint. And therefore we're participating with the tenant sanctuary group to put this other proposal forward in likewise senior legal services. Council member Myers. Casey, I just have a couple more questions. So again, sort of looking at the proposal, I was just curious in this situation, would this be typically approved with sort of the form city contract? So in other words, is that what we would be doing in terms of putting this together? So when we went through this process, we did use the form city contract. When we were, we actually did go through the process and they signed a contract, which was our form city contract. Unfortunately, they were not able to meet all the terms because insurance was one of the requirements, so. Okay, and that, but that's been remedied now with the new fiscal sponsor? Yes, the organization let us know in late December that they had a new fiscal sponsor that was able to provide insurance. And what is that fiscal sponsor? I believe. They even let me know that it's the hub for sustainable living. Okay. And I had a couple of comments. One around the mention in the March 19th program proposal about tracking data to yield stats of interest to the city. I think we all know we're in sort of an interesting time with regards to how we move through stabilizing the renters in our community and also going through our rental housing task force. And I would like to see more detail on what that is, specifically because that statement is unclear to me and it obviously may have bearing in where we go with things. So I don't know if we can get CCP to look at some of these things before we finalize this, but I think it's important to make sure we understand what that is just in terms of possible, just to make sure that we have enough confidentiality, expectation and some other things with the in current environment we're in right now. I just think it's very important that if we are tracking data we understand what that data will be used for, how it's, what are the questions that lead to the data, what is it that exactly might be coming out of it. So that would be one question I had or one clarification I'd like. And then finally on again looking at the budget and realizing that yes it's not a robust budget for potentially the amount of work that would be ahead. I wanted to make sure that the proposal or the scope of work I guess is what I would wanna call it in terms of what the deliverables will be. I noticed in conformate in correspondence with both UCSC and Cabrillo that they do have legal housing offices and I do wanna make sure that we understand whether students can be referred to any of those legal services at either of those campuses if they are coming through one of our hotlines. At least that's what I understand and communications from the university and we can confirm that. But in terms of understanding how we manage a small budget with potentially lots of requests, I just wanna make sure that if there are services through the university or through Cabrillo College that we're clarifying that as part of the scope of work as well. And those are my, I guess those are my two main questions and I don't know if you have anything in response to that or if we can include that in the scope of work or how this will work. If that's what the council directs, we can include, we can easily include that. As to the specifics on what the organization intend to do with that, I'm sure they'd be happy to speak to that as well. I'll just, I don't have any questions, but thank you Casey. I know that we as subcommittee members of the housing blueprint had discussed this option and recognized that there were challenges that occurred to be able to move forward with the services that we anticipated earlier. And I felt comfortable now that those are available to fall through with the 15,000. And then also I recognize that it's a different time and we've also moved in a direction of having a community process. And so my thought was to accompany this proposal or this budget adjustment to include a time of like maybe a four to six months to revisit it through the potential stakeholder group that will be vetted and then allow for it to be a temporary service, but for potential modification in the future based on the processes that we'll have in place. And at that time, potentially looking at the service, the scope of the service, the alignment to the intention of the group, as well as potential budgetary adjustments if necessary. Council Member Brown and then Vice Mayor coming. Yeah, so that was included in the motion that I just proposed my motion with the difference being a $30,000 allocation, but with the caveat that we're defining those services as time limited and subject to revision based on the task force and our stakeholder recommendations for future funding allocations. Should they be proposed? Would you be open to increasing the 15 to 30 once you have that process into at the stakeholder? After the time has. I'm assuming we can get that up and running to allow them to utilize the money within the six month timeframe. I was saying if maybe you would, I would be supportive of the 15,000 and then once that is going through, if at a certain point over four or six months or whatever the time duration be, that we then look at increasing it or making any adjustments in terms of scope at that time. I'm just saying what I'm hearing the group say is that they can't really do much with 15,000. So having access to that $30,000 for the four to six month timeframe is important. So if we don't approve it now and they, that can't demonstrate success based upon the 15,000, then we're kind of back where we started. So I'd prefer that we allocate the money now and include that the revised scope of work come within this time period and any progress reports as appropriate. I think that in the absence of not having protections in place for tenants and while we're waiting on this process to actually ensue, it's important that we provide some form of protections. Well, at a minimum services where tenants and landlords can go to within our community and the people who run those services are familiar with our rental housing environment and our housing environment. And I think that one thing that we've mentioned a number of times in the past is the necessity to collect data on things and so I think that this is a good opportunity. The previous city council approved of this. I think that it would be good for our community, especially some of our more vulnerable populations to have these kinds of protections in place and allow for this group to move forward, see how effective their services are given the finances that we'd be able to provide them. And then also when we revisit the advice of the task force and we begin to consider this further, we can then assess whether or not we may want to continue these services and increase funding or whether the funding is adequate to the point where we may need to decrease it. But I think that we should move forward with having some form of organization or group that's able to provide tenants and landlords with advice in our community. The room. I have a quick question, which I'm trying to see if we can get us to address your concern, Mayor Watkins, about distribution of the funding. So is it possible, I'm not sure exactly who to direct this question to move to allocate the $30,000 and to release 15,000 of it with the anticipation that the additional 15,000 would be released pending additional information, flushing out of the scope of work and answering some of these questions for the council, but that the commitment is to the 30,000 should we get that scope of work and have those questions answered to our satisfaction? And I would be supportive of that. I'm assuming that is possible. Those are just the two contingencies on a contract, right? Are you looking into that, Martín Bernal? I'm sorry, no, I was just distracted with another item. Tina was here, she could probably answer that question. Would that be possible in terms of having... She is here. Oh, there you are. Maybe Tina, can you answer that? Could you repeat? Don't worry about it. Maybe Casey heard us. Did you hear us, Casey? No, I'm teasing. Okay, do you want to repeat the proposal? So the question was the terms of a contract like this could we make an appropriation of $30,000 with an initial release of 15,000, ask the recipient organization to provide us with an updated scope of work and answers to some of the questions that have been raised here by council members and have that additional $15,000 allocation be contingent upon receiving that revised scope of work? Absolutely, that can happen both mechanically and in appropriation. You would appropriate the money and then we could do purchase order or set up a contract, yes. So then that would be amendment, amend my own motion, I guess, is that? That would be great. Do you accept the amendment? I accept. Okay, councilor, I just have one more amendment. Again, it's difficult because there's not a contract sort of here. So I'm just trying to figure out how all these pieces fit together. But I'm wondering, Sandy, if you would accept an amendment to also, within the scope of work or in the contract to express the need to keep data, number one, to consult with the city on the data to be collected and also that data remain confidential. Absolutely, yes. I think that was an expectation in the beginning. Okay, any further discussion? Okay, so we had a motion by council member Brown, seconded by vice mayor Cummings for the discussion. I just continue to think the scope of service and budget need more work and I honestly would be comfortable putting this off for one meeting in order to refine that. This just seems both overly broad and somewhat dated and somewhat unclear, a combination of things. So I mean, it'll clearly pass, but I think it would be probably helpful to parties on all sides to have a greater sense of clarity about what are the expectations and for what amount of money. So I guess even to include a condition that an updated scope of work and budget be prepared to the satisfaction of staff reflecting the questions that have been raised here. And I would also strongly suggest clarity on the parties involved in their roles and would very much like to see involvement, as I mentioned, of someone who represents a property management position from, and even could be a nonprofit housing provider, but I've personally found some of the nonprofit housing providers very helpful in exactly this kind of a situation. Their commitment is to good rental housing for people who need affordable housing, but they have a sense of what are the realistic managements to make that a well-managed property and worked with a bunch of the local nonprofit providers. And I think that would, again, that would be a beneficial addition to the core group. So I'm just gonna put those comments on the floor. I think suggesting a more updated and refined scope of services budget and timeline would be helpful for all involved. Council Member Brown and then Council Member Myers. I believe that's what I just did with respect to the question of involving, so I think that's covered in the motion that I made. The involvement of a non, representative of a nonprofit affordable housing provider, I would ask the organization, if you have those contacts would be willing to consider that it seems like a good idea to me. So I don't, that's, if you would like to have that formalized in the motion to ask that they do that, come back to us with an update about that. That's fine with me as well. I would just say just to remind us all that the city engages in making contracts with all manner of contractors and the city council doesn't even see those requests for up to $100,000. I mean, this is, as we saw with the golf course, hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of contracts ending up to a million dollars and we never even saw it. So for this amount of money, I don't think it's unreasonable to make that allocation contingent upon the updated scope of work and some additional information right now. And in some cases we wouldn't even be seeing this and the staff would just do it. So just want to remind us of that. Okay. Yeah, I just, I'm really interested in this succeeding. I think it's a really important thing to put in place. And that's really where my questions are coming from. I'm not trying to penny pinch or anything else. I just think that based on what the environment is right now, I think it's really important that if we are doing this, that you have as much at your disposal to succeed. And so I think that's where I'm coming from. I'm not trying to deny this or debate it, but I just want to make sure that it works for the whole community. And so I think clarification around scope and other things like that are really important. And so I'll leave it at that, but I am interested in this succeeding and that's a lot of where my questions are coming from. And I think, I mean, I'll just add that. I think this will be further refined as other iterations move forward over time, especially as the stakeholder process ensues. So, okay, at this point, I'll go ahead and make sure that we have a capturing of the motion with more or less the comments. Okay, all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? That passes unanimously. Okay, so the next item on our agenda is item number seven. And I believe- Mayor, I would ask when there is a refinement of the scope of services, et cetera, if that could be forwarded to us, that'd be great. Thank you. Okay, item number seven, I believe was pulled by Council Member Krohn. Okay. And item number seven. Seven. So the question I had, we're paying, it looks like this has to do with what residential security deposits. We're at 0.01% right now. And just a few people I ran this by, I mean, your money market right now is much higher than that. Very few people are keeping money in the bank just at that savings account. And then I ran across this security deposit interest rates from San Francisco. And it looks like they're paying 2.7% on the money that landlords are holding in security deposits, what they give back to their tenants once they leave. And I'm wondering why our rate, if we, you know, how we can bump this up, it doesn't really, it's meaningless right now. Okay, we have Assistant City Manager, Tina Schull. Hello, thank you. Good afternoon. I appreciate, I know you sent me an email, but I couldn't find it, so thank you. And I tried again, so I apologize. It's always tough on council meetings days, you have so much going on. Yes, so what this pertains to is that there is a chapter in the municipal code that requires landlords that are holding security deposits to actually calculate and accrue interest on behalf of the tenant. And then when that reaches $50, they have to pay the tenant. And so Council Member Crohn's question is, is what is, where was the rate derived? And annually we come before the city council to update that annual rate. And the process for doing so is outlined in chapter 21.02. It appears in 21.0210 subpart B. And it says that the minimum rate of simple interest shall be established from time to time by resolution based on the recommendation of the Santa Cruz County Treasurer Tax Collector as follows. The Santa Cruz County Treasurer Tax Collector shall contact a minimum of three major banking or savings alone institutions to determine the average interest rate that currently is being paid on savings passbook accounts. The Treasurer Tax Collector shall compute the average of these rates as a recommended interest rate to be paid on security deposits in the following calendar year. So in essence at the county, the Treasurer Tax Collector does this work. The Board of Supervisors takes it up and then per this ordinance, we just bring that same rate to you. So the Board of Supervisors took up this item, I believe on December 4th of 2018. And Edith Driscoll, the Auditor-Controller Tax Collector surveyed six banks, Bank of the West, JP Morgan Chase, Bank of America, Wells Fargo, Union Bank and Co-America and averaged it being 0.01%. So that is where that comes from and that has been our process. Now, Council Member Crohn points out that San Francisco had an interest rate of 2.7%. So I looked into it a little bit this morning so I could address this question. And 2.7% this year is up from 1.2% last year and then it was slightly lower in prior years. But the cause of the difference is just there's a difference in the basis for the calculation. So per Chapter 49 of the San Francisco administrative code, this is the basis for the calculation. For March 1st, 2015 and each year thereafter, the rent board shall calculate the rent according to the annual average of the 90-day AA financial-commercial paper interest rate. Rounded to the nearest 10th for the immediate preceding calendar year as published by the Federal Reserve. So they calculate it in a totally different way than the way we have it calculated here in our county. Now, I don't have current analysis about the pros and cons or why that approach was taken and if it's a appropriate approach, I don't know that. But that's why you have the difference. It's literally just the math is being done differently. Thank you, Mayor. Is there any member of the public who would like to address the council on item number seven on our consent agenda? Please come forward and you'll have two minutes. I just thought I'd share with you how I deal with a tenant deposits. First of all, in about 30 years and over several hundred tenants, I've only had like three actually asked for it. And what I tell them is, I'll tell you what, if I have to calculate the interest given the formula, I'm gonna give you the interest. But you calculate the interest and you show me your work, I'll give you three times it. Because it's a very complicated process with all the different changes from year to year. One took me up on that by the way. But I also might add that for my security deposits, I just keep them in a checking account. There is no interest that I receive. And I don't know where you get 2.7% interest except on maybe a five-year CD. So I think that's a little excessive, quite frankly. Thank you. Thank you. Is there any other member of the public who'd like to address the council on this topic? Okay, seeing none, we'll return it back for action and deliberation. Councilor Mathews. I'll move that we proceed with the proposal as written. We have a motion by Councilor Mathews. Is there a second? I'll second. Okay, second by Councilor Meyers. Any for the discussion? I'm not gonna support it because I just think that Mr. Mohissen just made my point that very few people even know they can get their deposit back. It's kind of ridiculously low. And I'm not sure everybody's keeping their deposits in a checking account for their tenants. And I think that they are actually, there's capital there and they should be paying tenants back what they're getting to. And 0.01% might even have an interest rate on security deposits. Council Member Clever. Just with what Tina shared with us. Thank you for that, Tina. Would you say that it would be worth our while to look at the formula that San Francisco uses and then see what it would look like if we applied it into our infrastructure? As much as I wish I was a finance director, I'm not in this moment, but I can certainly have that conversation with Marcus. As I stated, I just, I don't even know the pros or cons or why that was selected over ours. Ours has been on the books since about 97. And I believe all the jurisdictions in the county. So I can certainly do just inquiry and say let's learn a bit more about this, maybe do an FYI back to council. Yeah. And would you need a motion or an action by council since that would take staff time? I wouldn't appreciate that. Thank you. So I'd like to make a friendly amendment to direct staff to come back, what, 30 days somewhere in there? Something like that. 30 days with an analysis of the difference between our calculation structure and that of San Francisco's for deliberation and potential action to revise our infrastructure. Well, I'm happy to incorporate it if we just get it back for information and then take it from there. As opposed to what? I'm sorry, what would be the other, what would be the alternative? Well, that we don't necessarily schedule it for deliberation in action. We'll get an FYI, we'll have the information, then we decide if we want to. If we want to take what we want to do with it. I think there's some advantage to consistency countywide, for example. Mr. Condati? The action ultimately would be an amendment to your existing municipal code provision that provides for the current standard. Okay. So we have a motion by council member Matthews, the seconded by council member Myers with the recommendation as presented and a friendly amendment that was incorporated into the motion. It was incorporated into the motion to have an FYI be returned to the council on the pros and cons of different structures in regards to the percentage. Is that about some, okay, that's enough. Any further discussion? Council member Myers? I'm not sure why San Francisco is the one we want to look at. So I just feel like we're opening up a box here and I'm not real clear why we're selecting San Francisco as our comparing cities. So if there's a way to maybe, I don't know how to handle that, but I just, to just maybe look at all options in regards to how jurisdictions look at this. By county or something, I don't know. I just, yeah, that's inclusive. Okay. Then I will just to get the language right. Ask staff to come back in a month or so with information comparing our security deposit rebate with that exists in San Francisco or other relevant communities without going to a ton of trouble. Okay. Okay, all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay. That passes with council member Brown, Matthews, vice mayor Cummings, council member Glover, council member Myers and myself in support and council member Cron voting against. So the next agenda item from consent that was pulled is item number nine. And I believe that was. Thank you, mayor. Yes. This has to do with the resolution amending the city Santa Cruz personal compliment and classification. I just a couple of questions about the parks and rec, taking out the aquatic instruction and pool lifeguard, and pool manager positions. And I was just wondering if maybe our parks and rec director could speak to what the status of the of the Harvey West pool is right now. I'm assuming that's where these folks were assigned to when we had those categories filled. Correct. Yep. Yeah. For the record again, Tony Elliott, Parks and Recreation Director. When the Parks and Recreation Department seized operations of Harvey West pool, in 2000, well partially in 2004, but then fully in 2008 and entered, excuse me, into a contract with the Jim Booth Swim School to provide services at Harvey West pool. We basically took all of our staff, all of our operations away from the pool off of the pool since Jim Booth was providing that service. So since 2008, it's been in the process of providing that service. So since 2008, it has been essentially privately run through a contract that we hold with Jim Booth. As such, these positions that are on here have not been filled in about 10 years over 10 years, which is where the request to essentially vacate or delete these classifications comes from since they've not been utilized in over 10 years. In terms of next steps for the pool, something that we're constantly looking at, we provided an information report that I'd be happy to recirculate to the city council. We sent this information report to the council in November of 2018. And again, happy to send that background. We could get into the numbers of what it takes to operate the pool. Again, it's all in this report, but what we're looking at really a few different options in terms of the pool where we're heading with this, we can continue our partnership with Jim Booth, great partnership, but in the spirit of regionalism and partnering with other agencies, we've had discussions recently with the county in terms of what they're doing at Simpkin Swim Center, what we're doing at our pool, and how we can best kind of compliment to serve generally the sort of market that's within the county so that we're not duplicating efforts and being inefficient in some way. So some conversations ongoing there with the county. So would the county help support the Harvey West pool or? Don't know. Don't know. Yeah, in those conversations really are sort of in their infancy, but conversations that we're having and that's regarding the pool or any other amenities. So pickleball is a hot topic and we're talking about pickleball courts. Do we build them? Does the county build them? And how do we work together to make sure that we're not duplicating efforts within a really tight sort of geographic area? Well, I like to hear about working together. That's a good thing. The numbers I saw was 800,000 to keep the pool open the year round and then 400,000 maybe in admission fees and payments and stuff. So it'd be around 400,000 in that report that you circulated that it would take for the city to keep that pool open year round. That's correct. And that's an estimate really based on the numbers, the revenues and expenditures that we had in 04. So kind of extrapolating that and sort of forecasting what it would look like to open the pool up similar to the hours and days that we had in 04. Probably in the ballpark of 800,000 versus 400,000. And just to ensure that Mr. Condati, we're not going too far off on the topic of the pool. Okay, just making sure. But if I may, if we were to open the pool up again, then we could potentially reintroduce these classifications as needed. Correct. Okay, thanks for the question. Okay, is there any member of the community who'd like to address the council on this item? Yeah, we turn it back. I would like to make a motion that would go ahead and amend the classification compensation plans and the FYI 2019 budget personal compliment by approving anticipated classification and position changes and eliminating obsolete classifications except for the aquatic instructor, coach, the pool lifeguard and the pool manager. And I would like to defer that action and refer it to our Parks and Rec Commission for the purposes of obtaining their advice on the closure of the Harvey West pool and report back to the council. Second. So that was a motion by Council Member Crohn, seconded by Council Member Brown. For the discussion, Council Member Matthews. I am actually going to be voting against that because I think this gets into the whole issue of the parks master plan, what we are spending, what we anticipate needing to spend on the whole spectrum of parks facilities. And we did, I believe, ask that question in the budget session last year. And we got a number back on that. So I think calling out one Parks and Rec facility where the positions haven't been filled in 10 years really fails to look at the big picture of what all our demands are and our resources. So I don't support that. Other discussion? Okay, Council Member Brown. I'll be supporting it. One, the deferral on those positions is simply, it's not actually, there's no fiscal impact to us at this time. It is simply leaving them in place should we have a further conversation about opening the Harvey West pool under different circumstances. I believe there was at the time some support by members of this council. I believe there is continued support for that and that the issue ought to be revisited. So that's why I'm supporting the motion. I will support the motion as well. I definitely have expressed interest in wanting to reopen the Harvey West pool and would be happy to defer these classifications in the interim, so. Okay, Council Member Matthews. I would like to just ask the Parks Director, so this suggests that the reopening of the Harvey West pool be returned to Parks and Rec Commission in isolation, independent of all the other recreation and facility demands. I'm sorry, will you state that one? That's a motion, yes. Yeah, that's how I understand it. Yeah, so we can look at that independently. Okay. I mean, I'll just, if I may add, I think as it makes sense to your partnership with the county, as it makes sense to the planning to the previous memo and work and interest expressed by the Council to explore the reopening of the pool, I don't think it has to be sort of the standalone isolation item, but I mean, an area of interest for folks. That's what the motion says. And I'll just say personally, I'd be much more interested in having the time spent on collaborative facilities and programs with the county on pools and whatever else is out there. I mean, that to me sounds like a good place to put your energy for the future. Okay, Martín Bernal. Well, the other issue, of course, is the finances. And so that's the other place where you can obviously look at this too is in the context of the budget. Obviously, I mean, the commission can weigh in, but ultimately we'll have to figure out how to pay for it. And so that would mean likely carving out other places in the budget to make room for it. So that would be what the council would have to do unless you want the Parks and Rec Commission to maybe carve it out of what they see in the parks budget. Councilmember Cron, would you be open to modifying your motion to be inclusive of best next steps that feel appropriate but with the same intention of understanding what it would take to reopen the Harvey West pool? Outside of simply just having it return to the Parks and Rec Commission. Well, I mean, I think the city manager makes a good point that if they get it now, they can look at it before our budget session takes place in May and give us an opinion and advice. I've been hearing about the pool for many years and it's not something that's going away and I would like to, as you mentioned, revisit it. I think it's a good idea and I also think that empowering commissions is a good thing also. With the desired outcome, kind of hearing the desired outcome, I think Parks and Recreation, we can do some work on this and bring kind of a variety of scenarios back to the city council, which may include a partnership with the county, Jim Booth Swim School, kind of looking at the financial impact as well and review all of those different options with Parks Commission and then bring that back to the council. So really it could be kind of a menu of different options for the council. Fantastic, that sounds great. That would be a motion. I'd be quite prepared to support if you care to change your motion. I would assume that that kind of work would go on because that's what enlightened me when I received an email from our Parks and Rec director that said, oh, maybe there can be some partnership with the county on getting that pool open. So that's why I'm making this motion. So I'm assuming the Parks and Rec Commission under the direction of what the director just said is going to look at all those options. So if I'm hearing, I think everybody is on the same page in regards to the movement. All right, sounds good. All those. Could I just have the motion restated? I better not make the motion again, but we can bring back several options for the commission and council to consider. Okay, so with the information coming from the Parks and Rec department with a menu of options and partnerships that will be brought before the Parks and Rec Commission for our consideration at the council. Okay, all right. Is everybody feeling clear? And just to clarify, that would include not including the positions and the deletions as well. It would include differing that those positions still being deleted at this time. Okay. Okay, so that was motion by Council Member Krohn, seconded by Council Member Brown. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay, that passes unanimously. Thank you, Tom. So Council Member Brown, I believe you polled item number 11. So I just wanted to bring this one up because while I understand the need to approve this contract amendment potentially to get this work done, I am really interested in, before we do that, sending some kind of formal communication to county environmental health, asking for a response from them, justifying the time delays and substantial cost requirements that we see laid out in this agenda report. I'm told that the Third District Supervisor's office is willing to be supportive of the council in trying to get some answers from county environmental health. And so I'd like to defer approving the contract amendment pending a response from county environmental health. Chris Schneider, Assistant Director of Public Works. The contract amendment is really time critical. We have to get this work done so that we can get the plan set and out to bid. It requires approvals from county environmental health of what we call the work plan, which is in progress. Since the staff report was written, we've met with the Regional Transportation Commission and county environmental health. And so they are on board. They have tentatively agreed with the schedule we need to move forward without losing our grant funding for the project. So cost is still an issue, but however, at least we have some confirmation that they'll play ball with us in order to get the project ready and out to bid. Councilor Brown. I'm just gonna say, we've had that every time we've approved these amendments from what I understand. So I mean, it's just on, what's to say they're not gonna do that again? I mean, what's to say they're not gonna come back to us and say, oh, we couldn't get the bid to get, I mean, oh, we've found that there's some additional costs associated with this soil testing for arsenic. It just, with no explanation. I mean, I just don't understand why we can't ask them to say they need to justify the extra cost for us to pay for it. The costs are for our consulting team to do the soil sampling. The tensing, et cetera. I agree, we're very frustrated with this as well. However, we feel like it's moving forward at least in the right direction for the time being. If any hiccup comes up, it'll be soon in the next two to three weeks and we would be more than happy to bring it back for more action. If I may, would it make sense to ask for future consideration that they provide a justification so that if this were to return that that is sort of contingent on that? Or would that meet your needs, potentially knowing that this is sort of time sensitive today? I mean, something, yeah. I mean, I guess I can live with that. I'm not happy about it, but I could live with that. I do feel that some kind of formal communication has to go to them because we could, I worry that this is gonna, they say, oh yeah, we're staying care of now, but the experience is not borne that out. Okay, Councilman Matthews and then Councilman. Well, this just leapt off the page in me. I mean, the frustration of the additional requirements and the time delays both, which sounds like it's so frustrating. So it's good to hear that little progress has been made. I think given that it's very time sensitive, I think we need to approve the motion as presented but also include direction for communication from the mayor appreciating that some progress has been made, but emphasizing again, urgency, fill in the words to have more reasonable, justifiable requirements and a timely response cooperation with us to get the project done. So I'd be here, I'm happy to make that kind of a motion. Okay, let's, so long as it's clear that we want some kind of response from them. So why don't we go ahead and pause? Let me just make sure there's nobody from the community who'd like to address this on this item. This is item number 11. Okay, seeing none. Council Member Cron and then we'll go ahead and return if you're interested in making the motion. Assistant Director Public Works Snyder, do you think that, I mean, have they tried to justify this at all to you or is this the appropriate thing? Would it be appropriate for us to be writing a letter from the mayor and council saying, hey, you know, what's up? This is like too much time and expensive. I'm not sure how to answer that. Sorry. Publicly? Yeah. Politically, that's your choice to, you know, decide if you want to write a letter. Will it help us? I'm not sure. We seem to have an agreement now at least moving forward. Interest of county environmental health is to protect the public. And that's a very broad category and reason and how you do that and how you interpret the results of the sampling, how much sampling you require and how often is what is driving this expense. They only have one person that covers the county that does these reviews. They've agreed to make this their highest priority review and our consultant has also agreed to make the additional testing high priority. So I think that's where it's moving in the right direction. This also will inform future rail trail segments that we build. So some of the work that's taking place now will also assist later. It's not just focused on segment seven, which we're hopefully gonna get out to bid at least on phase one soon. We wouldn't want them to drag their feet because we're pushing them and then all of a sudden they, oh, so I don't know. I would like to do the letter, it seems like appropriate thing, but if what Chris says, I don't know. I see it has taken a very active role in meeting this now. And I think that's made a big difference. The directors have talked and their subordinates are in the room, they heard it, they were told, this is your priority. So let's get it done. That's what I was gonna suggest is that we copy the RTC on our correspondence and really in the letter say, it's important that we go forward with this both in terms of the demands and the time, the delays and it appears we're making progress. This is a priority, not just for the city, but for the whole county. So do you, do you wanna make that a motion? Okay, yeah. I'll move that we go forward this with direction for the mayor to write a letter to the county environmental health, copying supervisors and RTC and any other parties that might be appropriate. That was a motion by council member Matthews. Is there a second? Second, asking for response about the timeline, the time delays and costs. Related to the demands and the delays, our desire to cooperate and achieve a priority project. So motion by council member Matthews, seconded by council member Brown. You brief state the motion again, specifically what the letter should say. To the RTC with copies, to the county environmental health copies to RTC and other appropriate parties stating our concern for demands of work to be done and time delays, appreciation that progress is being made and that we hope for their continued priority attention to this project that has county-wide interest. That do it close enough? Yeah, if we could just make sure that other parties includes the third district supervisor's office. It's specifically just so they don't get a lot of them. I would say all supervisors. And that we would appreciate hearing a response from them. Okay, thank you. So motion by council member Matthews, seconded by council member Brown. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay, that passes unanimously. So that then concludes the consent agenda portion of our agenda today. And we'll move right along to our public hearings. So next on our agenda is item number 14 and that's the public hearing for 1720 Westcliff. And it's appealed of the planning commission's approval of a coastal permit. And I believe that we have a, we'll need to entertain a motion to continue this item at this time. Is that correct? I'll move the motion to continue the 1720 Westcliff drive appeal to the March 26, 2019 council meeting. Okay. So that was a motion by council member Meyers, seconded by vice mayor Cummings. All those in favor, there's no public comment. I'm ensuring no. We'll return back. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay, that passes with council member Brown, Matthews vice mayor Cummings, council member Cron, council member Meyers and myself voting in favor and council member Glover is absent. Okay. So we have a student delegation send off from Shingu, Japan and that I believe we'll be coming around four o'clock and we will go ahead and postpone that agenda item until their arrival and that is item number 15. So we'll move right along. Did I skip 13? Did I skip 13? More straight water maybe. That was on the consent agenda. Oh, that was consent. Yeah. That's right. No, no, no problem. Okay, so then our next agenda item is a general business item, which is the mid-year review part three, study session on capital investment program, the CIP. And do we have Tracy Cole here from finance to present to us on this item? Not quite yet. You're calling. We're calling. Actually. Why don't we take a, we'll take a five minute break. We'll take a five minute recess and we'll return in five minutes with maybe Tracy here. Thank you, Mayor Watkins. I'm Marcus Pimentel, your finance director. I'm here with Tracy Cole, our budget analyst, principal management analyst. So we'll power through. This is our part three of our mid-year review and it's more of a refresher, a recap of things that are going on in local government and what's happened in the past and what we're looking forward to. And it's all setting us up for the upcoming budget hearings and community outreach and ultimately the budget option for our fiscal 2020 year. We're starting with a little bit of why now. So this is part three. So why are we here now? We're not asking you for action. This is more of an informational session. With last year's budget adoption and included the capital improvement program. We have a robust capital improvement program everywhere except the general fund which has a very, very small trinkle of, I don't know why that word popped into my head, but a very small sliver of funds for the general fund. Last year was the first year we had some general fund funding and it came out of, thankfully, out of Measure S. The voters approved the Measure S sales tax increase. We used that first year's allocation to fund as much of the CIP program as we could. So we're here today to, it's just an informational item just to recap where we've been in the last two meetings and a little bit about our CIP program. This is in preparation for upcoming May. We'll be releasing our budget in April. We'll have some more reference materials. We have the last two presentations are now online in our fiscal 2020 online budgets page. We'll be scheduling some CUMI engagement and certainly we'll have the May 8th budget hearing day for all of you. Just said all that. So we're recapping our focuses on the CIP program. We're gonna end with a little bit of future, like how do we, what do we do with the CIP? When you hear me say $300 million of unfunded need before considering anything new that emerged since last May, that's as of last May. So there are a lot of new topics. There's housing issues. There's other capital projects that have been discussed about as of last May, we're at 300 million. So we know that number's bigger. What do we do about that? No clear solutions now other than we need to keep pushing towards what could we do? So I just saw a recap of what we talked about in our first and second study sessions. Right now we are in the local government is not in a boom cycle. We're actually looking at general fund deficit forecast coming up for the next 40 years. The state is again gonna double the pension payments. Looking to backfill for the state pension investment shortfalls that CalPERS is seeing. The decreasing tax spaces, we'll touch on those a little bit in a couple of slides later about our sales tax, utilities tax, gas tax, all of those are declining or staying very, very flat. The projected economic slowdown in one of our prior presentations we talked about that we're currently in the second longest period of US economic expansion and that can't sustain itself. And then unreasonably low reserve levels. There is no disaster contingency and our general fund reserve is only at about 10%. Hey, so we talked about the state's investment shortfall in the pension system. If you take a look at the pink and the red lines on this graph, these are the bars where the general fund benefit costs should be and what we've been anticipating. And then the blue bars on top of that, that represents the CalPERS investment shortfall. So as you can see those shortfall amounts are increasing even more than what our general fund benefit costs should be. Let's go for it, yeah. So this graph represents where CalPERS should be if they had invested and earned in just the midpoint of the market. They could have been fully funded with a surplus of $65.3 billion had they just invested their investments at the midpoint of the market. I think we all understand this graph. We've seen a few times sales tax, tangible items now, such as video games, CDs, things like that, they're now downloads and so we're not getting those tax revenues on these thanks to technology. Also the aging baby boomers, they're shifting their spending to non-taxable healthcare items and services. And the law is still playing catch up before online sales. Gas tax, as wonderful as ride sharing and fuel efficient electric cars are that does decrease our revenues for gas tax and the franchise and utility tax are decreasing thanks to online streaming and cell phones. And lastly, we are not alone. The city of Santa Cruz last year we adopted a 2019 balanced budget but other cities have not been so fortunate when we did our fiscal comparison study last year, the presentation last year, which is out on our website by the way. A lot of the cities that we compare ourselves to they adopted their budgets with a deficit. And so I can just recap and now we're moving forward. This is an informational item more focused on our unfunded need. Again, we had $300 million of CAPR projects we couldn't fund and weren't unable to fund as of last year. And so we wanted to focus on well, what is that 300 million? We're examples of that and that's where we'll spend most of our energy. We're gonna start with just a little refresher what the CIP document is, how to read it. It's a little bit different from the rest of our budget but certainly has a lot of informational materials. Of course, I meant to say our award winning budget. Forget about that. But within our CIP it starts with some opening information. There's a little two page narrative that gives us some technical information about how to read a document, what it contains in there. We open up the CIP part of the budget with the climate action plan. So these are projects that are incorporated in the CIP they're not separate of, they're part of the CIP program but the Cities Climate Action Committee looks through all the different CIP programs and provides recommendations and then groups those projects as far as which ones are supporting the climate action plan. So it's not a separate listing of, it's just we pull out of the CIP those projects that support the climate action plan. So in one place you can get a quick shot of all the things we're doing that are supportive of that plan. Also contained in the budget document is what I've been talking about, that $300 million list. Last year's list was partially reduced by about $1.5 million, again thanks to Measure S. So we had in the general fund, we identified three different tiers of projects that were all at a level that needed an investment in fiscal year 2019, but we weren't likely seeing how to get to an investment in 2019. So we grouped those into three different categories, staff did analysis of looking at the risk factors, the economic need, the efficiencies of doing a project now versus waiting as well as the alignment with the city council goals in the work plan and it came up with composite ranking that grouped projects into three different categories and that first grouping was presented to council adopted and when and if a Measure S ever passed, we were gonna be able to fund it some portion of it and thankfully again with Measure S passing, the priority level one projects were funded last year, but we didn't, we're unable to get to priority two or priority three projects. So those projects added to our unfunded list. So just information. Within the narrative section, there's a table in there that can, sorry, we'll work better with, I don't like to bash our profession, but sometimes it's too easy to. We fall to tables too quickly, tables, headers, we love them, but there's a table in there that groups the projects by types and you can look at all the different funds that have CIP projects and get a sense of where they get their money from and the types of projects that are within those funds. So there's a table in the report much bigger than this, easier to read, there's just a picture of it. Now breaks down that information and you can see all the different funds and the typical projects that are in those funds and the typical funding sources. So when you flip over a few more pages and you actually get down to the project level, you can see a narrative about each individual project that has fiscal amounts, a headline about what the project is, and then a narrative usually about a paragraph of what the project will do. Included in the program is actual costs from prior year from two years ago, the current years where we're trending, where we think this year's gonna end, as well as projecting out next year's proposed budget and then the following two years possible budgets. Again, the council adopts next year's budget only the next 12 months. So May 28th, the council will be considering next year's budget that will be only fiscal year 20, even though our CIP plan looks further out. We wanna understand what's coming down the pipeline. So in the CIP program, you can see what's coming down the pipeline. Last year's program had a three year and we've expanded it to five years now. So when you see the 2020, you'll see two more years added on cause we wanna keep peering further out. Our ultimate goal is to get to a 10 year and then maybe even, hey, why not a 20 year? But at least have one place where we can see those big projects with big investment things coming at us. We get down to the tough part of our conversation is the $300 million list. So what we wanna do is just go through a few slides and highlight some of the, there's a long list in the program, but we wanna highlight a few of them and talk about them. In addition to what's in the unfunded list, every year there's something new and just, I think it was yesterday, we got heads up about a possible sinkhole on Capitol Road, not a possible asynchole and we just were uncertain as to whose responsibility it might be, it looks like it might be the county, but there's always one unknown unexpected project that comes up every year or two. So in addition to the unfunded list, these are just different picture images of things that we would like to get to, certainly Harvard West, ball field lighting, civic auditorium, we've been talking about that for a long time. There's some solar panel projects that make financial sense, but we just, we haven't had the capacity to be able to do them. Those are examples of things, anything, certainly long west cliff drive, there's a lot of need there, most certainly. We start with one of our unfunded projects, the civic auditorium now. I took a little liberty and did a little Google searching when we found this old picture from 2015 and what the civic could be. Again, this isn't a plan of, it's coming, this is just, this was an artist rendering of what it could be. In the unfunded list, we have $2 million set aside as possible starting money for the CIP. Again, there's no money to do it, we just think there's $2 million there that we might need for starting money, modest improvements, but if we were to look at reasonably the full scope of the project, it's probably a 20 million plus project depending on the level of investment that's required. So what I'm distinguishing there is we have $0 now. The unfunded list is only showing $2 million, but in reality what the committee might want is probably a 20 million net worth project. The wharf is another one of those examples, no money now, within the unfunded list there's a million dollars there or as a placeholder and we really think that what the committee might want is possibly an over $20 million project. So even then, in the unfunded list when I said $300 million, we've already seen there's at least another $38 million that could be added to that if we look at the full possible value of just these two projects alone. So there's a lot of need there. The fire department, there's always a need for more training apparatus in our community. There's a need for co-located, co-used training facility. Again, to defer more to the fire department, talk a little bit about this, this is one that's been identified as a possible project that there's a need for and there's a need to have more training and we like to keep our staff local instead of sending them far away to do training that they take an engine away off duty, they take staff on duty away from our community. So we love to be able to do that training in a place that's a little bit more reachable and closer to home. So we wouldn't have our staff so far away with an active engine. Right now there's zero allocated and there's a placeholder for $2 million of what that project could be. Another example of our unfunded list is the Pogonik Clubhouse renovation. Not knowing what the price tag would be, there's different visions of what might be out there or leave it alone. I mean, there's a whole gamut of things, but there's zero funded now and there's a $5 million placeholder for that. Again, without any articulating what that $5 million would get you, it's just identifying that there is a need there and there's a community, when and if we're ready to have that conversation, we'll have to understand what the scope of that might be. Moving into our scenic trails, there's segment nine that's on our unfunded list. There's portions of segment eight and nine that are in the active budget. So right now we do have some funding portions for segment eight and nine, but there's a bigger section for the segment nine trail that isn't still on our unfunded list. We'd love to move that to a funded level, but we don't yet have the roadmap in place, but staff are working on it. Mentioned solar PV projects. You can look up, well, maybe not look out your back window, but if you had X-ray vision and could see through the annex building, you could see the solar PV that we have here in the parking lot here. There are other installations that make a lot of sense financially for the city. For example, a Corp yard expanding at the Corp yard would make a lot of financial sense. We just haven't been able to commit the budget authority to doing that. PV, there are certainly some other opportunities throughout the city in different locations as well. Right now we have $1.6 million of possible projects out there that all things being equal, we'd like to move forward with, but just with the funding, the lack of funding and the funding prioritization, they haven't made that recommended cut in our recommended funding level. West Cliff Drive, $4 million is a placeholder, zero funded. We have moved some money into the 2019 priority level. One of the bigger priority level of projects was about $500,000, $450,000 for West Cliff Drive work, but certainly to remediate that whole section, it's a much stronger investment. So we know that price tag is there. We know the need is there, but we don't have the ability to move that forward just yet. And those, one of the many, many different pressure points that we have of how do we get to some of these big projects that we should do, would like to do, and just don't have the ability to do. Stormgrain, there's any number of stormgrain projects that have been on the list since I've been here. And we've been able to make progress on some of them, but certainly not to the level that we like. This is just kind of an image of our intersection on Water Street of what happens when a stormgrain fails, and what it should look like when things are dry and sunny, but when the systems are working, they're fast, they're immediate, and they do have big costs, and we certainly, they impact transportation, they impact property, we'd like to be able to address them all. But the Stormgrain Fund and the General Fund both have an inefficient ability to do everything that's needed. Ocean Street improvements, this has been a long time project concept to work on the gateway of people coming into our community along Ocean Street. There's a lot of great ideas that have been discussed and researched, but no funding, and upwards of $6 million possible allocation. Right now there's no funding for it. Again, it's just another example that's on our list. And then railing out some other ones, there's some big ones that have a lot of components to them. Certainly our active transportation plan, if you look at the whole thing, it can total up to 135 million, plus or minus street overlaying reconstruction and facilities master plan. These are complex concept projects that are a combination of a whole bunch of roads and facilities, but we know that's a level of the need that's out there that shows the trend line. There's a lot of need that we don't have the ability to move forward with. We're in a community of 150 year old, 152 now I think. We have a lot of need. A lot of our infrastructure, a lot of our facilities are 75, 80, 50 years old. They're worthy of some considerable investments and we just don't have the ability to invest in those facilities. I'm gonna pause there and just see if there's any, if that made any sense or not sense, but if that resonated with some of the bigger projects that are on the list. Councilor Mayes. Just on the stormwater items, is there, do we use Measure E funds for any of that or is that just stormwater as related to water quality? We've used some stormwater, but there's not enough funding available. Yeah, it's not a lot. The general fund's been the one moving those projects forward. And so it's, it's, pausing to see if there's any other comments on that. That's good. Thank you. Councilor McCurn. Two questions. The climate action plan projects, I didn't understand what that was. Was that the list that you had up on the screen? Yes, within the CFP budget, there's a listing of all different projects that are pulled out and said, these are the projects that are meet and support the climate action plan. So it's a, it's a reprint, essentially of projects that meet the plans. Which one was projects again? What's that? What were those projects again? There's a whole, there's 30 or 40 of them, their own. There's charging stations, it's right there. CIP page number four of our 2019 budget document. My other question was, maybe it's for Chris, it's how do we pay for stormwater, you know, systems do we have, is that a tax? Is that come out of the general fund? Or there, could there be like an area, you know, a neighborhood area that might initiate that? Chris Snyder, Assistant Director of Public Works. There's the Clean Beach Fund, which is really a small fund. It's mostly for stormwater quality. And, you know, since like funding, monitoring Cal Beach, things like that. We have a stormwater fund that addresses maintenance and projects for the San Lorenzo River and Brant's 40 Creek, which shows up on people's property tax bills. And that, again, is sufficient, or not even sufficient, but really covers what happens on San Lorenzo River and part of Brant's 40 Creek. In other parts then, the rest of adding storm drains has been really the general funds task. And that's why it doesn't happen very often. Every couple of years we do fund a storm drain project, Curtis Street storm drain phase one was a year or so ago. We have the, a storm drain project in this year's budget, which has moved to the top priority that actually we're opening bids on today, along with the sewer project. And, you know, hopefully there'll be an opportunity to do more. Can we create a storm drain district? Do we have any of those in the city? We haven't done an assessment district for storm drains in the long time. The last one was, I think, the Harvey West area that include transportation and storm water. They're expensive to initiate. You have to get property owners to agree, et cetera, but it is possible. There was some movement last year to make storm water an enterprise fund and the law changed a little bit, but nobody's gone far enough that we're aware of to know whether it really applies or not or whether it'll get challenged. We don't wanna be the guinea pig, but we continue to look and see who else has tried it. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you. So at this time, we'll go ahead and ask that Marcus maybe pause the presentation and we can take a moment to acknowledge and have a proper send off for our student delegation on their way to Shingu, Japan. So we'll return to item number 15. So this is our city council and sister cities official send off for the student delegation to our sister city of Shingu, Japan. And I'm pleased to introduce Gail McCollum, our co-chair of the Santa Cruz sister cities committee for Shingu, Japan, the subcommittees. So if Gail wants to please come forward, is she outside? When she comes in. Gail, please come forward. Thank you so much for being here. Konnichiwa, good afternoon everybody. It's so exciting to be here. I'm Gail McCollum. I'm the chair of the Shingu subcommittee for the sister cities. And I'm thrilled to introduce to you our delegates that will be going to Shingu, Japan. We've had a relationship with Shingu, Japan for 45 years and for almost that many years we've been trading teenagers back and forth between Shingu and Santa Cruz. So Mayor Watkins, I wanted to let you know before we present, if you'll help me present the certificates to the delegates that we're gonna be going over to Japan on March 28th and we'll be returning on April 7th. So it's coming up really soon and we're super excited. They've also been taking classes in culture and language so they're getting really prepared to go. So if you would like to join me to present the Mayoral Certificates to the delegates there's been a request that you use this. All right, excuse me. So Isabella Tarazas, here's your certificate. Manrubia, yeah, okay, do it again. We have Grant Smith, congratulations. Mateo Livingstone, Tris Lasky. Thank you. Yes, thank you. Is that Bateman? Okay, where's he going? I don't know where this is going. Thank you so much. You hear me, I'm a teacher, can you hear me? Yeah. So this is Moeco and she is from Shingu. She's 26 years old, is that right? Yes. And she's been living here for almost two months getting great ideas to take back home to Shingu and so she's gonna be leaving soon and then she'll be greeting us when we get there in just a couple of weeks. So she speaks excellent English, by the way. Yes, you do. And so I just wanted you to meet her and see her and know that she's been here for a while just enjoying our city. Do you wanna say something? Oh. Thank you for having me here for internship. When I was junior high school student like them I came to Santa Cruz for one week and home stay. So this is my second time. So I'm so happy to hear. Thank you so much. Thank you. I hope you enjoyed your stay in Santa Cruz. Yes, I enjoyed so much. Thank you. Great, thank you. Can the students come up with pictures around the diocese? That would be okay. Please, please, absolutely. And you can take a seat or stand behind a member. And we'll get a photo. Yes. Or. Yeah. We have the city council. We wish you the best to have an incredible trip and experience and safe travels and we'll see you when you return. Hi. So I'll just thank you, Marcus and Tracy for pausing your presentation for us to send off our delegates. We'll go ahead and return back to item number 16 which is our presentation and study session on our capital improvement. So where we left off is just if there were any questions about the types of projects in our own funded list. And Council Member Brown. Yeah, while we were on storm drain I had another question related to the unfunded list because I've had requests from neighbors to follow up on this related to the Travis and storm drain project which continues to be way down the list as in not in the priority areas at all. My understanding is an ongoing issue that has been discussed for many, many years, many decades now and the neighbors were under the impression and have in fact been told you're up next, you're up next for many years now. I have, I can provide some additional specifics on that but I think Mr. Schneider may have already seen some of this if you got the emails that I was getting. So I'd just like to know where that's at, why we are not funding the Travis and storm drain when we've said we were gonna do it all this time. Is there, oh yeah. Chris Schneider, Assistant Director of Public Works. We've never promised anybody a storm drain until we know it's in the budget, an approved budget. The project has been, there's been a little design money dedicated in previous years but never enough to construct the project. I think in this forthcoming five-year CIP, you'll be seeing it out about 2022, I believe. And it competes with the other areas that need storm drains and it's something that's been seriously lacking in the city of Santa Cruz for a long time. Councilor Meyers? Yeah. Councilor Meyers. The unfunded CIP projects are always daunting. I wanted to follow up on a question about a storm drain, not assessment districts, as an enterprise fund because I think you alluded to that. Is there any progress on that? We haven't seen any movement. I don't know if anybody else has been there. I was under the impression that there was a statewide movement. Yeah, but I think the concern is being challenged by primarily taxpayer organizations, yeah, that are opposed to that. And I'm sure there's some, there'd be needed some effort to establish the enterprise fund and to do that. I don't know how much work is involved in doing that and what kind of outreach is needed to establish that. I actually have a question. Now there's no permitting state legislation, is that? That is a storm, oh, maybe I should ask something. I think there was some state legislation, but I think there's a question as to its validity and whether it requires any vote or approval or not. But there was some legislation, I can't recall it off my head right now, exactly what it was that intended to provide some flexibility there, but it's been, I think, caught up with legal issues. So I'm not aware of any jurisdiction that's actually implemented at this time. And then, Council Member Myers, did you have something to wait? No, no, no, okay. Do you have a different, no. I do have a question, just, I'm sorry. But if Council Member Matthews is done. Okay, Council Member Myers. I just want to, I just, I know you guys, especially in public works, do a lot of grants. And so I'm just curious sort of Marcus and, you know, a department's perspective with all the various bond, obviously bonds that get passed by the voters. A lot of that is capital money. And just curious how we assess the use of those kinds of things for some of these unfunded capital projects, because some of the funding is quite significant. So I'm just curious if there is, I know there's a city policy around grants, but I was just curious as we look at the CIP, if there's any kind of consideration of how we may hit some of these, either water bonds or park bonds. There was the transportation bond, 1E, Measure 1E that got passed years ago. So I'm just curious, how do you look at that? And is there a threading of the needle that you try, we try to do it all with regards to sort of getting a project as Chris knows the term, you know, as competitive as possible with all the funding and everything else. How does that weigh into our sort of capital thinking? Now it is. Well, we're very active in going after grants and actually getting grants. We've got a good track record. You're primarily for transportation. None that I'm aware of for storm drains, unfortunately. Sometimes environmental restoration. We've been looking for some, for like Pogonip Creek for environmental restoration of some of the waterways, but even those are really difficult and not often around. Sometimes these grants take too much of a local match to be worth it and that we don't have the money to match the grant. Transportation generally has been good. It's been in the 10 to 20% match or none at all. And you'll see, I think we've given you updates before, but of all the different grants, transportation grants we've gotten. Council Member Brown? I'll just say, I mean, I just want to add for the conversation, to the conversation that, I mean, the correspondence I've received said that for many decades now, there is flash flooding down Trevathin as water collects from neighboring streets. Down Trevathin, in a river, sometimes on both sides of the street, sometimes including the street, causes damage to cars, onto properties into garages. Sometimes sandbagging helps, sometimes it doesn't. Recently ran at a community meeting regarding AEDUs. I ran into Lynn Robinson, who had been working on this when she was on the council. And people have said that Public Works workers who are working on storm drain repairs and other neighborhoods have said Trevathin is next. So I'm not disputing that, you would never say that, but somebody's saying it and there is the impression in the community that they've been waiting for a long time. It is a significant impact. It was exacerbated beginning in 1996, just to talk about how long they've been talking about it when speed bumps were put in there. So this seems to be a significant problem and I'm just wondering how do we get it to, I mean, I know you said it could be next, but it sounds like they've been hearing that for a while. So I'm just, what would need to happen for that to get moved up the priority list from the list of 300 million with no priority color or number attached to it? Let's see. I can tell you how much money we need. 200,000. Yeah, 200. So I don't know what other projects would have to get off the list in order to fund that. That's the issue. Ladera court is, which we went out to open bids on today is a similar situation. The street floods, there's damage, water enters people's garages. We have pictures of people on there, stand up paddle boards. So we're very aware of trivathen. I've been out there when it was raining a lot. So we know it's a high priority, but all the ones we're hitting are high priorities. So. Okay, I have some other comments when we're ready to close this item out. That's the key priority. How I really would like to know how the priorities are set because we've got several storm drains, Chestnut Bay, Ladera, trivathen, Curtis Grant. Right, so Curtis Street, phase one, we did, as I said, about a year or two ago. It's working well. There's a second phase that we may need, but we've, we're holding off on asking money for that because we may not ultimately need it. The project we're doing now, the reason that we're doing it now is because we also have a sewer project that has to be replaced, that's in the exact same area. Slight difference, but essentially the exact same area. So we're able to combine the projects together. There's more bang for the buck. So we'll be able to get that one done. So we look at different things and we may look at a paving project and see if we know we're gonna pave the next year, we don't wanna, or we've just paved, we don't wanna cut the street open. Now, Trevethan can be done as a standalone project and it's just a question, again, of the funding. So again, I don't understand what the priority is. How do you know, then what's the next one we address? I think Trevethan is one of the next ones to address. This is, which, Steve, which one's this? LaDera. LaDera. So we'll hand out some pictures of LaDera. I don't wanna beat the dead horse that Council Member Brown was, but I've got another one from a former council member, probably about 12 years ago. He said that I drove all over the neighborhood and the streets and observed all the runoffs, he's speaking about Trevethan. Second, to go south on Trevethan. But I studied it a lot and realized there's relatively a low cost fix from either the second or third house from Soquel on the west side of the street. There could be a new storm drain. The pipe would only have to go about a hundred feet and connect up to an existing storm drain. Is that, I mean, does that make any sense? That's why it's only 200,000. Because, you know, it's $50 to $100 per lineal foot for storm drains, the manholes, the street repair, the catch basins that are installed. So, yeah, it's not a big project. 200,000 is not a big project. Any suggestions on what to tell the public and like, because they always ask me how do they know when, who's in line for what, like street paving, same thing, but how do we know who's in line for the next storm drain project? That's based on the budget process that we provide to you every year. And we've been doing a three year program and it will show the subsequent years for a variety of different projects. Fortunately, the storm drain projects compete with other general funded projects, building maintenance, general funded and other activities as well. In general, what has happened is during the budget process, there's a limited amount of general fund allocated for CIP, if any. And then the council just looks at all the list of all the various and then takes and figures out which ones to put at the top of the list and then includes them in the budget. And in the last go round, we had the sales tax measure and so we, as part of the budget process and as part of that agreement prioritized, as Marcus pointed out, some of those projects so that we could also promise to the voters that have passed, we would be able to fund some of these projects. And so those were prioritized in that process of establishing the measure and putting it before the voters. So we did that process as well and that did pass. And so those projects are moving forward. Council Member Brown and then Council Member Mathews. So Council Member Brown. So the Water Department has given us a long-term financing plan, I guess, to help us understand how it's going to pay for the $200 million needed in water system improvements over the coming decade. And I'm just wondering, because with public works, there's so many different parts and different funding sources, it's very challenging to figure out what pots of money can go for what and storm drain is just one of them. I mean, we have transportation need 200 million out of 300 million is for transportation for this big, big CIP list. And so I'm just wondering, does public works have such a long-term plan? I've never seen one. It would be really helpful to have something like that for us to understand how all these funding sources fit together. So that's one question and kind of comment. And then I also want to try to figure out a way to move forward on considering storm drain either it's standalone district or augmenting the clean beaches of the Measure E funds or something so that we can get some of those storm drain improvements happening without them always being held up by general fund constraints. So that's a comment for hopefully motion making, but I want to see, do we have a, is there a long-term financing plan? Let me just jump into it. Explain this to us. Their nature of their two organizations, Public Works is a whole group of different operations for the wastewater sewer, different enterprise funds. Water is one unique fund who has a dedicated funding source and they can leverage that as they need in the future. So they have more ability to plan out a master plan as it's a matter of coming to council and working on fee increases. The bulk of the Public Works products that we're talking about don't have a funding source identified for them. They're when and if state money becomes available, when and if do we increase local taxes? So it's harder to develop a long-term plan unless you actually have reasonable sense of what the funding is. We can set a priority in place and maybe that's what you're looking for. Like hypothetically, if we had $100 million, what would you do? That's an interesting idea, but I think what's missing in the Public Works arena is they don't have that dependable funding source for many of these projects as the water fund does because it's a one-to-one fund that has water rates that can fund every one of those projects. So it's just different animals. It makes it a lot more challenging to. And maybe I'll just add that when we have our budget hearing and process, that's when I think some of this discussion can ensue in terms of where our priorities are as our budget direction. This is good warm-up. And yeah, so just sort of reorienting us to what we're having and receiving today, which is just simply a study session on our capital improvement program. Yeah, so I have a note to self to revisit this, but I just wanted to bring it up because if there was such a thing, then it would be helpful to see, but I can defer that to our budget hearing time when Public Works is on the agenda. We have longer-term plans for enterprise funds like the water department, so wastewater, refuse, parking. But for streets, facilities, all those things that the funding sources aren't there to really develop a full plan. Now for paving, we do have a computerized program that gives us lists of projects based on condition, et cetera. But then when we get that long-term plan, every year we have to compare it to, oh, where's the water department doing their projects? Where's wastewater going in? Where's PG&E tearing up the streets? So there's a lot of coordination even when you get the list that you have to go through and make sure you're not in conflict with something else. Sometimes we can also share it with a different project like one of the ATP projects, for instance, we may be doing crossing improvements where we're gonna pave the street, so we may include the two together at the same time, things like that. So yeah, it's tricky and it's interesting. All right, go ahead. So just finishing up our recap as well. We've been recapping over and over again. We're just in a different economic cycle. The economy is doing well, local government isn't. We're seeing an erosion of our summer revenue basis. Our core costs are going up beyond our control. We spend a lot of time talking about our CIP program. It's a large number. I mean, when you get to $300 million, it becomes too big of a number to comprehend, but you start breaking down down to parts to get a sense of all the different areas of need. And this was a perfect example of the conflict that comes between project A versus project B or any one of the projects A through triple Z that are waiting in line and we're looking for funding. So we'll have some more activities coming up. We'll have community engagement. We will certainly have a strong day on May 8th with our budget hearings. We'll have a budget adoption scheduled from May 28th and 90s study session. And we look forward to some active questions, comments and direction. Finishing with what can we do, it is harder in this space. We don't have a defined, we can just follow this path and we'll be cured. But we do recognize that $300 million will have to be taken part by part over time. We can't address that in any one, two, three or four years. Essentially, our entire city budget is around $300 million. So essentially, if we stopped all operations and did nothing for a year and everybody took a war call a day, we'd be able to tackle that list. But that's the order of magnitude that we're at. It's just not sustainable. So we do need different solutions in place. We need probably some legislative actions. Could use some, certainly discussions about local funding or collaborative funding methodologies. There's more effort we might need from this group, from the community, from your leadership about what areas should we pursue, whether it's an in-price fund, storm grains, those are interesting ideas. But it's, direction would be helpful about where we invest our limited resources and where we put that priority. That's always there, but that comes with, you gotta pay it back and you gotta pay it back with interest. So there's a lot of complications that come with funding projects. Okay, well, I know we've had some questions at this point. And I wanna thank you both for your presentation. So this will be an ongoing conversation as we enter into budget hearings. If there aren't any further questions, we'll go ahead and move right along. And is this a public comment? Is there any member of the public who would like to address the council on item number 16, which is a study session on capital improvement programs? Okay, seeing none, we'll go ahead and return to council. And it looks like we have no action to take today, but thank you for the information so that we're better informed moving forward. And we'll go ahead and move along to our next agenda item, which is agenda item number 17, which is the 2018 general plan and housing element annual progress report. And we have Catherine Donovan as our senior planner of advanced planning. Technical difficulties. Airwalking is at the step away for a sec, so she asked if we can, for me to run the meeting. So whenever you're ready, we can go ahead. Good afternoon, I'm Catherine Donovan, senior planner in the advanced planning division. And with me is Sarah Fleming, our principal planner for advanced planning. And we're bringing before you our annual general plan and housing element reports. They're two separate but kind of co-joined reports. These reports are required annually to the state. The housing element report used to be required only of charter cities, but was also required for much of our state grant funding. So we always did it anyway. There's been recent legislation that has changed many things about the housing element report. And one of them is that now all cities, both charter and non-charter are required. The general plan report is not required of charter cities. However, again, grant funding. So we do that anyway. And these reports are intended to give both the local legislature and the state legislature an idea of where cities are in complying with their general plan goals and policies and their housing element requirements, particularly as they relate to meeting state housing guidelines, popularly known as RINA, the Regional Housing Needs Allocation. So in this report period, there are a number of new requirements in the housing element report. And it used to be this nice report that had, I think four different tables that easily fit on one eight and a half by 11 page. And if you looked at what you got sent in your packet, I did my best, but you probably needed a microscope to read it. We do have a summary table in this presentation and I can provide that to you if it would be helpful. And so that new format comes directly from the State Department of Housing and Community Development better known as HCD. And since that is the report format they provide, we are required to do that. And that's why you got that very unwieldy package. In it, the new requirements have to do with much more substantial reporting on our applications. It used to be we basically only reported on affordable housing projects and on building, excuse me, building permits issued. We now report on planning permit applications submitted, planning permit approvals, the building permit issued and building permits finaled. And then we also report on projects that use density bonus, which we had one project and projects that used the AB35 streamlining process, which we did not have any that use that process. So the report this year was substantially larger and more complex, but I think the upside of that is it also gives us a much better snapshot of where we are in time. I'm gonna start with our annual general report. As you could see in that report, the general plan includes a city-wide implementation project process, lots of goals and policies for all of our different departments. And we've just highlighted some of the things that have been important in 2018. Our parks master plan was submitted in 2017 and then revised in October of 2017. And we're now in the process of updating the mitigated negative declaration, the CEQA document that goes with it. And that should come online relatively quickly. We also had the Pacific Laurel and Front Street project that received its planning approvals this year and has submitted its building permit application, but it hasn't been approved yet, hasn't been issued. We also have our wayfinding project underway. The design was completed in 2018 and they're going out with an RFP for the manufacturing and installation in this year. Moving on, as you heard earlier, we're moving on the rail trail project and on our climate action project in particular, we wanted to highlight that there are carbon fund, we continue to collect funds for that and do city projects to reduce our output of pollution. Our bike plan, our Measure D transportation funding, we continue to utilize those funds to look into alternative transportation projects. A complete update of that was presented to the Transportation Commission. And then we have our new project this year was the jump bike project, which has been really phenomenally successful. And finally we have our street smart traffic campaign to try to get to zero traffic accidents with pedestrians and bicycles. And so that is pretty much the general plan report. The housing alert report is based on our regional housing needs allocation. This is a, it's a statewide problem. The HCD looks statewide, they get numbers from the Department of Finance projecting how much housing is needed for that period. They work, they allocate it out regionally and then each regional organization comes up with the allocation for the individual jurisdictions. So our regional association is the Ambag Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments and they allocate our RENA. It's for a period of 2015 to 2023. Normally it's an eight year period but they squeezed in an extra year there because they're trying to align us with a couple of other planning, region wide planning projects. And they, the RENA is based on building permits issued, which is normally when we talk about housing, we talk about how many housing units have been completed because those, as far as we're concerned, those are real numbers. Those are houses that people are moving into whereas building permits issued, being issued doesn't necessarily mean it's gonna be completed. But HCD wants the issued permits so that's what we provide. And for this period, our total number is 747 units. This table was in your report. This shows where we are in our, towards meeting our RENA in this period. We're a little, it's a nine year period for us this time. We're just short of halfway through. We've already met our moderate and above moderate. We're doing well on our low income, we're at 75%. But as you can see, and I have said this before, the very low is just really, really hard to meet those numbers. When we had redevelopment, we did much better but without the redevelopment funds, it's very difficult. And as you can see in this report, the six units that were provided this year, those were all in one project and that was the Water Street Affordable Project. And that's usually how we get those very low when we have an actual dedicated affordable project. Occasionally, you'll see in 2016, there was one unit and I believe that was one unit of affordable housing that was in a project by Habitat for Humanity and they had an ADU that was very low. So we continue to advocate for those projects in every way that we can, but without a funding source, it's very difficult to get those going. This is what I mentioned earlier, this is the summary table of that very long, very small table A2. So this just gives you the numbers that were provided this year in terms of applications approved by planning, building permits issued and building permits finaled. And you'll notice there after we have the gross total, there's the demo and duplicates. And that's because there were 24 units that were demolished and replaced with another unit and there were an additional 24 that moved through more than one category. So they're counted as both an application approved and a permit issued or a permit issued and a permit finaled. So to make the numbers real, we subtracted that 24 and what we are adding in this pipeline is 469 units. Now, as I said before, units finaled, those are real. Units, applications approved and permits issued doesn't necessarily mean that we'll get 100% of those units. So take that 469 with a slight grain of salt. And one of the things you invariably ask us is how we're doing compared to other local jurisdictions. So we're giving this to you right up front. And this is data that we got from HCD and it's based on the housing element reports that were submitted in past years since the 2018 report has not yet been submitted. We only have the numbers up to 2017. And Scotts Valley has not submitted these reports so we were not able to get that data for Scotts Valley. You can see that we are doing extremely well in our total numbers compared to other jurisdictions. And the only place where we're not doing as well and somebody else is doing significantly better than us is the County of Santa Cruz has done, I won't say they've done well, but they've done better than we have with their very low income housing. And that has to do with, again, the dissolution of redevelopment because the funds that they were able to utilize prior to what we like to refer to as the state snatchback of redevelopment funds have come to fruition. We still have some funding to be utilized. The Pacific Station project has some funding set aside for that, they were able to use their funding more quickly and so they've already been able to get some of those units and that's where the 42 units and the 13.2% we checked with them to make sure that was correct. And so that's the end of our presentation. If you have any questions, be happy to try and answer them. Thank you. Council members have any questions? Council Member Cronin? Thank you for the presentation. The 42 units is at one complex in the county? I know it's more than one, I am not sure if it's two or three. It could even be more. And when you showed that other table, 449, those were projects in the units in the pipeline? This one here, the development pipeline? Yeah. Yeah, those are units that have either an approved planning entitlement, a building permit issued or the last column or the building permits are final. And when we say moderate, what is that? It's between 80 to 120. 80 to 120, yeah. Median income and then so above moderate is just market rate. Right. So if you add this 444 number has not yet been added to the 337 number that's in on page 17.3, right? It was in 337 units. We've, that's why we're at 108% of our arena number for above moderate. They would have been counted because, well the applications approved would not be counted. So the 287 are not counted. They count them issued. So they're counting the 90, 63. They might be counting those if the building permit was approved prior to 2015, because if it was approved prior to 15, there are some that the building permit was approved in like 2007 and they just finished them. So my point I guess is that if we added that to what we have here, this is gonna be like off the chart. As we got, we're at 108% now. We're gonna be over 200% if this all gets. It's kind of apples and oranges. So the, I think what you're talking about is this chart. Yeah. And this chart includes everything that had a building permit issued up through 2018. So most of the units on this chart that are permits, all the permits issued, the 90 or the 150 permits issued are included on this chart. The 302 units, none of them are included on the other chart. The 65, some of them, probably most of them are. Right, just, and then if you look at our very low and add those seven, those are all on this already? No, well, the six are one is not. The application's approved one, that one is not. And the Water Street project only had six very low, which is what, from 30 to 50% of the median? It's below 50. Anything below 50? Right. And then it had 53 units that were low. The Water Street had a total of 41. Okay, so I'm looking at, okay, so 41 and low is 50 to 80% of the median, or what? Yes, 50 to 80. Okay, thank you, Mayor. And just one more thing on the Water Street project. They're using section eight there, but we don't, there's no guarantee at what level those section eight will go, because they'll be by individual. So we don't get to count those as low as they probably will be. So in terms of how many very low units are going to actually be there, there's probably more, but we can't count them. So are there, are there questions? Yeah, thank you for the report. And thank you for finding a way to get the information into a space that was, we could actually read it with a magnifying glass, at least, better than nothing. Appreciate it. So I, and also appreciate the decision, what I understand from the staff report, to kind of reevaluate how ADUs are categorized from, based on the assumption, previous assumptions, that that would be affordable by design. It's not in your report, but that's its terminology that we see a lot in the moderate income category, but recognizing that reality may not, that suggests otherwise based on your sample, informal rental price survey, I think. So I appreciate that. I'm wondering if, so, but that didn't change any of the previous numbers, it just reflects a new way of categorizing. And so, and that will continue over time. Will there be some kind of ongoing evaluation of what had used to be considered moderate, but maybe no longer is? There won't be a reevaluation in terms of our, our housing limit reports and our meeting arena numbers. HCD does not require that. So if it was considered, I don't know if you could read the small print, but on the page that had the arena report, they did it by deed restricted and non-deed restricted. So if when it was issued its building permit, it was considered a non-deed restricted unit that was affordable for some other good reason that we actually have to explain to them. They allow you to, they don't make you go back and take it out. In terms of the way we keep track, we have a list of, we keep a list of all of our ADUs and we track the affordability on those and we track the actual affordability of an agreement. So if there was an agreement that requires that it be affordable at some particular level, then we count that as an affordable ADU, but we don't have that other affordability by design factor. They were actually when we first were getting a lot of ADUs, they were actually at the low income level and over the years as we keep doing these reports and looking at what they're renting for, the rents continue to go up. So if there aren't any additional questions, I'll go ahead and open it up to public comment. So we're on item number 17, which is the 2018 general plan and housing element annual progress report. If you're interested in addressing the council, please come forward and you'll have two minutes. Thank you, Mayor and council members. I'm Ron Pomerance. I'm wondering where Housing Choice Vouchers fits into this profile you've laid out today. How many Housing Choice Voucher recipients are in the city and are they reflected at all in your numbers here today? And there's project-based vouchers is another way the city can tap into very low and low income folks to live in the city. So if I can hear some discussion on that, I appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you. Are there any additional members of the public who'd like to address this on this item? So seeing them, we'll return back to council. I don't know if you have the answer to the question that was asked. I do. Okay. If the project has, section eight vouchers come in two varieties, one is the project-based in which the project has an actual contract that stays with the project for a long term and the other is, I've forgotten the term, but it's non- housing choice. And the housing choice we don't include in the RENA, the project-based we do. Okay. Thank you. Okay. So now would be the time for action and emotion. To the floor. Councilor Brown and then Councilor McDonough. Well, again, thank you for the work that you have done bringing us this report, very informative. And daunting in some ways when we see the, how far we have to go in achieving meeting our goals in terms of low and very low, and we know we're sorely needed in our community. So with that, I'd like to move that we approve the staff report and provide additional direction to send the general plan and housing element annual reports to the planning commission for review. And that the planning commission, this is a bit off topic from the housing element portion that we've been focused on here, but that the planning commission also be asked to review the general plan corridor policies, policies for a golf club drive, the golf club drive area with an understanding that the general plan and our zoning maybe do not match up with respect to those two areas. So I'd like to, at the same time that we approve it, direct that the planning commission take a look at this and send us any recommendations should they have any. Okay, so we have a motion by Councilor Brown. Second. Second by Vice Mayor Cummings. For the discussion, Council Member Mathew. I'd just like to ask the planning director, where does that golf club drive issue sit? That's been around for decades. Good afternoon, Council. Lee Butler, planning director. And yes, the current general plan calls for up to 400 units. There have been conversations with the property owners. Out there they have been organizing and seeking to start taking the next steps towards putting a development proposal together. Really, it would be an area plan or a specific plan that they would be looking at as is called for in the general plan. I believe the general plan calls for an area plan. So they would be looking at preparing the information related to that. I also heard in Council Member Brown's motion, the corridor and golf club drive and was there? Just those two. Okay, and so certainly we have a certified housing element and in relation to Council Member Brown's comments about the relationship between the zoning and the general plan, the general plan calls for us to along the corridors revise our zoning districts such that we facilitate growth in the areas that provide close access to transit, to jobs, and so forth. And so that is one of the founding principles of our general plan and that is how we've got a certified housing element. And so that is a pretty broad set of direction there and any additional specificity would be appreciated if the Council is looking for us to provide any information to the Planning Commission or have a discussion with the Planning Commission having some direction on what that is intended to accomplish or the direction that you'd be looking to have that conversation ultimately achieve would be helpful. But if you want to go. For right now, that part of the direction is consistent with what they would be on their word program anyway, correct? So we have as part of the Housing Blueprint Subcommittee recommendations that came on June 12th of last year, recommendation and direction from the Council to proceed with the rezoning of Ocean Street. We do not have a specific direction from the Council to look at the other corridors. So we have that in our work program. We have been getting other items in our work program, the tenant or excuse me, the rental housing task force and so forth, for example. And so we were scheduled to actually begin that initial outreach and initial conversations about the Ocean Street rezoning effort early this year that with the other priorities, we haven't been able to accomplish that yet. So yes, it is in the future work plan as far as Ocean Street as next on the list and then prior to proceeding with other corridors, we would come back to Council and discuss those. I know it's been a hot button item in the community and with just the direction on one right now, we would be looking for additional direction from Council before we proceed with the others. I think I'll also add that we will be beginning a process around strategic planning and having more sort of kind of direction for you all once that process ensues. So I think we will have an opportunity to revisit some of the interests or priorities. And if I am also hearing you correctly, if we were to add an additional direction, would that then require the removal of something else from your current workload? Certainly there are workload implications for any additional times that we go back to the planning commission. I think having additional direction on what the intent of that is, I mean, there's nothing that's being put forward on Golf Club Drive right now. There are some initial inquiries and the group of property owners or at least a subset of the group of property owners has met with us to discuss next steps and how they might proceed. But they have not come forward with anything concrete. My understanding is they've been doing that for many years. I don't know about how many property owners have been interested in that. So while there has been a meeting with some of those property owners and they have shown some interest, frankly, it could be years before they bring stuff forward or it could be months. I don't know. They haven't given me a specific timeframe on what their plans are. But certainly we've got general plan policies that we would be looking to guide that work when the property owners choose to proceed. Okay, Councilor McBrown. My request is simply to refer the report to the Planning Commission and just as we've seen it for review and in addition to call out requests that they consider as part of that, review of the general plan corridor policies. So I'm not sure how I would get more specific than that to specifically look for different things within the corridor policies. Or this is just a matter of asking the Planning Commission to weigh in for our future considerations. Not asking for a whole bunch of additional staff time as far as I can tell. Councilor Matthews and then Councilor McBrown. I think the recommendation for us is to accept the general plan housing element and submit them to the California State Office, not to the Planning Commission. I'm just, so that and also refer this to the Planning Commission and also to not saying don't approve it. Okay, so both. Yeah, it's just additional recommendation. Submit is fine. On the motion to accept the general plan housing element and the annual progress report. Submit the reports to the California Office of Planning and Research and Department of Housing and Community Development. And refer to the Planning Commission for review the general plan corridor policies and policies for the golf drive area. Do we separate those? Sure. Okay, Councilor McBrown. Well, I also wanted to say I don't see why this is vague. And you said the hot button issue corridor plan. Well, it's because golf club drive is not that well known yet and that's going to be a really hot button issue. So I think it's very appropriate that the Planning Commission take a look at both of these. There's 400 units per acre. Yeah, I don't see the community embracing that. Okay. Okay. Did you want to split the question? I just assumed split. I think they're two different things. We'll go ahead and split the motion. Is it okay? Okay, we'll split the motion. The first motion will be to essentially move forward with the recommendation as presented in our agenda packet. So all those in favor, please say no. Are you? Aye. Aye. Aye. Okay, any opposed? Okay, that passes unanimously. And then the second element of the motion would be to submit the plan to the Planning Commission to weigh in on. Senator, go ahead and read. Yeah, go ahead. Refer the general plan and housing element annual report to the Planning Commission for their review and that the Planning Commission also be asked to review the general plan corridor policies and policies for the golf club drive area. The second. So that was already seconded by the next one. And there again, my question, I guess it's to the planning director is how does this fit in with other things on your current list of projects? And to the mayor, I think, what will be the opportunity for us as a council to say, here's the whole list of big planning issues we need to confront and what as a council are. Thank you. Asking for direction from both the planning director and the mayor about how does this one specific direction fit into the list of big planning projects and issues that we may want to consider and prioritize looking at the whole list. So I don't, I don't just, I'll say, I don't disagree that these are big issues, but where do they fit into the whole picture? Sure. So we have a very full workload. We've got things that have been lined up for years that are identified in the journal plan that we are, that are in our queue to complete. We also have specific direction from the council from the June 12th housing blueprint subcommittee. We may have additional direction I'm expecting as this council moves forward with the work plan. They will have items. So it really is going to depend on what comes out of the review as the motion is suggesting that a review of those policies occurs. Well, a review of those policies could result in a whole range of additional suggestions. They would be suggestions that the planning commission then would bring to that. The planning commission would suggest and we would then present to the council with the council being the policymaking body. They would then consider what of those suggestions from the planning commission. They, the council as a body wants the staff to act on and then depending on those, that's what's going to affect the prioritization between the housing blueprint, the journal plan items that are already called out, the housing blueprint subcommittee recommendations and then the priorities that the council calls for as part of their next prioritization session. So if I could just finish that question then we'll move on. Do you feel comfortable with the workload demands of this direction compared to is it a doable level of review with planning and then sending their recommendations back to us? I'm just trying to get a grip on what we're doing rather than just like every meeting, putting new things on your list and everything drops down. I very much appreciate that because that is exactly what happens, frankly. Doing this in and of itself is not a substantial amount of workload, frankly, because our direction is the policy. The policy of the general plan, there's not much involved with sending this to the planning commission and saying, this is the policy. We don't have any direction from the council as part of this motion to say, review these policies to establish how we can facilitate additional development along the corridors. And so that's where I think when I was getting at additional direction, that's what I think would be helpful. Just saying a review of the policies doesn't point us with as much specificity as I think could be helpful, but if it's just review the policies then I think we would just collect those policies, put them in front of the planning commission and ask them to comment on it and whatever comments they provide, we would then provide a response to those in the presentation that we bring those to council with. Council member Brown. That's my goal. My goal in doing this is not to initiate a whole bunch of additional work for the planning department, if that's not necessary. It's kind of why I wanted to leave it without a request that they make any formal recommendations. It's possible they'll review it, say okay, we've reviewed it and we accept the report too. It's possible they may say we would recommend that you consider rethinking the corridors policies. I mean, I don't know what might come out of that but I would like to leave it to the planning commission to just, should they be inclined to take that seriously and look at it, make a report that we could then put in the mix of our decision making for future. I mean, I'd like to hear from, I guess I'm just saying, I'd like to hear from the planning commission as we make decisions, if we make decisions at all, about what we're going to do in particular with respect to those two areas for development. Well, it's really not an ask for, to bring more work your way, unless it's productive and helpful to you to do that. I think that there'll be a lot of opportunity for us to really revisit where we are in terms of the work that we've outlined through the subcommittee that was adopted in terms of the housing blueprint and areas of interest based on upcoming interest by the community or potential for development or what have you. So personally, I would prefer to put that conversation on pause after we have a strategic planning process type ensue and have some familiarity for our new council members to understand where we're at with some of our intentions set prior. So, but recognizing absolutely to Councilor Matthews point, these are going to be hot issues, absolutely. We could hear it and figure it out from there, but without kind of more particularly specificity for me and intention on behalf of the entire council on where we're hoping to head with things, I'd like to wait on that conversation personally, but I'm one of seven, so we could go ahead and take the vote if you like. Councilor McCormick? Just I was going to say, let's call a question. Okay. Do you have a second for the question being called? Are you calling the question? Okay. I just had one comment. With respect to this question of workload, what I would ask is what we could do is if, depending on what it turned out to be, that we would assess what would be impacted and what we would not do or what would be affected and we'd bring that back to you so that you have a good sense of what it means with respect to workload, which I think is a good practice to have in any case, but... I assume that would happen. No, not really. I think the question's been called. Okay. Okay. I think we can make it more valid. The question's been called at this point. Okay. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed? No. I'm a no. I don't know what we're doing, so I'm going to vote no. Not quite clear on the request, so... Well, I voted yes with the understanding that, as the city manager said, there'd be a quick review of where this fits into the overall workload before plunging in deep. Okay, so that passes with Council Member Brown, Matthews, Vice Mayor Cummings, Crown, Glover, voting yes. Council Member Myers and myself voting no. But who's plunging in deep? I don't get it. The Planning Commission wants to plunge in deep. That's up to them. That's a good thing, I think. Well, as usual. Okay. Yes. I would like to bring up one more item before we move on. And it relates very directly to this issue of the general plan and housing element. Last night, I went to the district meeting of the League of California Cities. The speaker was Jason Rine. He was the Assistant Legislative Director for the League of California Cities on Housing and Land Use Policy Discussions. He gave a great presentation. I will share the PowerPoints with you, and I would actually hope he could come and speak sometime in this area. And as you all know, housing, here's our western city, housing is the topic of the day. We got an alert from the League of California Cities yesterday asking for city support for SB5, which is a measure for local state sustainable investment incentive program. And it's aimed at creating a local and state partnership to provide up to $2 billion annually for approved projects. It's basically trying to recreate some of the tax increment capacity that we lost with redevelopment. So without reading all of it, I hope that you guys know about this, you're nodding your heads. So this is gonna be heard before the Senate Governance and Finance Committee on Wednesday the 20th. They're asking for letters from cities as soon as possible. And basically the talking points are the elimination of redevelopment. In 2001, created a huge deficit in community revitalization resources throughout California, including an annual loss of a billion dollars in funding for low and moderate income housing. SB5 provides opportunities to access additional tax increment for affordable housing, infrastructure that affects our CIP discussion, and economic development projects. It asks us to describe how our city suffered from the loss of redevelopment related to housing and how loss of redevelopment has affected our city and how we would benefit from a renewed state investment. So I'm giving you a recap here. So what I would ask, this is I think directly relevant to this housing discussion, our previous CIP discussion, and a theme that comes up regularly for us is how can we look for additional state legislative support to help us meet some of our needs. And so what I would do is ask that we find an urgency. We just, and I talked to the city attorney about this because we just got this alert yesterday and the deadline occurs on March 20th. I'd ask that we make a finding of urgency and authorize a letter of support on this measure. Seconded. Is that a motion? Seconded. So motion by Council Member Matthews. Seconded by Council Member Myers. One really quick comment. The PowerPoint, actually we, Deanna Sessoms from the League of Cities sent it to us this morning at 9.15 a.m. So we all have it and it is really... It's dense and it's really informative. So take time to look it over. Yeah. Okay, so we have a motion and a second. All those in favor please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay, that passes unanimously. Thank you for bringing that forward. So at this time we will move along to item number 18, which is Homeland Security Investigations Raid on Seabright Neighborhood on February 15th. And I'd like to call up our community liaison, Peter, who will make a brief announcement regarding his availability to help with interpretation. I'm sorry. Oh, sorry, sorry. Oh, Peter, please, yes. So Peter will be available to assist with interpretation both during the item and if a member of the public needs assistance during public comment. So. Hello City Councils and also people of the audience. And if by any chance there are people who are Hispanic and want assistance, please let me know. And we have a chance to translate this whole scene simultaneously. So just talk to me and I'll be right there in the corner to be able to translate. Yeah, just I think most of you have met me before and guess I have to do a new face or... But anyway, I was hired by the city about four months ago to be the community liaison. And I feel like I want to be the ears and voice of the community, but also both ways, a communication bridge between the city and the people. And I would say, I guess he has worked because during this event, several members of the community called me and were very concerned. But we'll talk about that further on. Thanks. Thank you, Peter. Thank you very much. Okay. So I know that this was an item that was brought forward by three council members, I think, and communication with staff. You're welcome to introduce the item. We could jump right into public comment. Do you want to tag team it? Go ahead, sure. Okay. So I believe I was the one that made the motion at the previous council meeting. This came after a violent and threatening experience with the Immigration and Custom Enforcement when they came into Santa Cruz under the guise of a warrant or service of a warrant around criminal charges, but then proceeded to terrorize not only a family in our local neighborhoods, but also the surrounding community that experienced a no knock raid, I believe, at four o'clock in the morning with flash bang grenades, guns drawn on children as young as 10, I believe, as well as the removal of the individuals from their home without the warrant present or being presented to them. Also to find out later that the warrant did not have their names on it for the people that were in lack of a better term, abducted. And the adults then were taken forcefully from the house with black bags over their heads so they couldn't see where they were being taken and then were transferred to what we now know to be the sheriff station over in the Live Oak area for interrogation where according to reports, their interrogation questioning was made up predominantly about 75% by their estimation to be pertaining to their immigration status. So it's terribly disconcerting, especially as Santa Cruz has gone on the record to say that we are a sanctuary city and we need to be figuring out ways that we can not only talk the talk and say that we're a sanctuary city, but create policies or guidelines or standard operating procedures so that we can adequately resist federal terror and so that we can make it so that the people that are within our community that are valuable to the diversity of our community and have been here for generations feel safe and secure in their homes and in living their lives. Any additional comments from it? I just want to, I think you did a good job. Thank you, Councilmember Glover. I wanted to thank the Sniders and the Mendozes for inviting three of us into their homes as well as all the neighbors. I've really found we had some productive conversations and I think we need, this is really a big deal and I think that the city council is taking it very seriously. I think our police chief is taking it very seriously and we're open to suggestions in where the neighbors want to lead and I do want to say that there was representation from Congressmember Panetta's office at the second meeting we had. He immediately gave that information back to Washington DC and they did send a letter to Homeland Security or HSI Homeland Security Investigations so we're in the outcome of that right now. I don't know what exactly that letter said. He didn't send us a copy but they are very aware of the situation and I just want to make that clear. So thank you all for coming today too. Okay, Councilmember Brown. I would just add that my appreciation for the neighbors for speaking up about this inviting us to be part of the conversation and to really get us moving in I think the right direction to try to address this more formally. People have asked well what is the purpose of a community conversation? Is it just to covetch and to vent? Are you asking for something out of this? And for me I really feel like it's kind of all of the above. It's very difficult and troubling that it's so difficult for a local jurisdiction to have any ability to stop this kind of action from taking place in our community even when we express that we explicitly do not want to participate as the chief of police declined to participate in the Santa Cruz police department declined to participate. We are on record as a sanctuary city and yet this still happens. It is quite frustrating but I think that having the opportunity for us to come together to raise our voices and to also as part of that community conversation together think through what we can do moving forward to support our immigrant community. So whether that's additional resources and community volunteer resources and perhaps other resources for rapid response, those kinds of ideas I think come forward and are improved upon when we have the conversation together. So that's one of my goals at least for holding such a community meeting. And so I just wanted to add that into the mix and again reiterate that I want to take my lead at least from the community and what you'd like to see happen in structuring it. And I just want to acknowledge that we do have our law enforcement here. Did you have any additional insights that you'd like to share with us or the community in regards to this item or what took place that day, if appropriate? Yeah, I didn't mean to speak for you, but it just happened. Mayor, council members and Mandy Mills, police chief and we two are concerned about what took place. Having said that, it was interesting to hear the community members tell us and maybe clarify some of the points that may have taken place there. Really the only way to find out what actually took place is to have an investigation by the federal government into their own agency to find out what was exactly done and why it was done. And so I would certainly take any questions that you might have if you need me to. Questions, council member? Well, I think you expressed to us in some communication that you did follow the city's direction in terms of our sanctuary city policy and declining to become involved. So if you care to summarize that for the general public that that might be of interest. The city policy is that as soon as practical after an event that we would notify the elected officials and the city leadership that a Homeland Security enforcement activity took place, that was done so shortly after this particular event. As you probably know, we were notified ahead of time and give credit to my staff. They asked some very tough questions of Homeland Security as to why this was taking place in the manner that they had described it was going to take place. And that is why we chose not to participate in this particular event. And it became pretty clear that it did not match the high ideals of this community and did not match what our policy and direction was. And so that is why we chose to decline to be involved in any way, shape or form. As you know, we did have one sergeant standing by about two blocks away from the event in order to be able to coordinate medical services for community members and or agents should somebody be injured during an incident. Certainly has its upside and its downside not being involved. We don't know what took place. That's if we're not there, we can't testify to what took place. We wouldn't have body worn camera recordings of what took place by not being there. But at the same time, not being there also sends a message to this community that what we will and we won't do. And so that is why we chose the path that we chose. Okay, if there aren't any further questions so we can go ahead and open it up to public comment. I received requests from two organizations who'd like to speak on behalf of their membership. So I'd like to invite Maryam from your Allied Response Team to speak and you'll be given four minutes. Can you hear me okay? You can move this down. I'm a little short. Hi, Mayor Watkins and council members. My name is Maryam Gaforio. I'm a volunteer with your Allied Rapid Response or YAR. We're an all volunteer run organization and we run a 24 seven bilingual hotline that community members can call if they see ICE, DHS or other repressive forces or if they're impacted by a raid. We dispatch community members that have been trained in legal observation and de-escalation to support callers and we also provide support to impacted families in the aftermath of a raid. On Friday, February 15th, we had responders on the ground within less than 10 minutes of receiving an alert that there was a raid taking place. And I want to take this opportunity to share some of the facts from the Homeland Security raid that happened on Friday, February 15th. The first relevant fact is that the people targeted in the raid were not named in any warrant and were not deemed to be a danger to the public in any way. This speaks to the absolute disproportionality of the level of force and terror wielded in the raid. The military presentation of these raids at 4 a.m. is timed for maximal impact on the psyche of the local community and the broader Latinx community, both undocumented and documented. The agencies involved have multi-billion dollar budgets and expansive powers and the idea that they cannot find a more efficient, less terror-soaked way to find people wanted for questioning is ludicrous on its face. The spectacle of force and the trauma that radiates outward from these incursions would be so simple to avoid that it is obvious that the trauma causes a conscious choice in these raids and not an unfortunate side effect. The second relevant fact is that it does not matter whether the Department of Homeland Security, whether what they did was legal according to federal law or not, it was absolutely inhumane, a violation of universal human rights to go into a neighborhood with this much force, refuse to ID themselves from those who asked, throw flashbang grenades, put hoods over people's heads and keep people in custody from 4 a.m. until afternoon with no food or water. This meets the definition of spate-sponsored violence and given that actions taken by DHS are most probably legal and given that they are most clearly immoral, we'd like to know what the city council will do to remedy the wound that has been created in the community and YAR has some suggestions. At the federal level, our representatives need to push for an investigation into this to hold accountable and expel from office the people responsible for this raid from the appointees who signed off on it to the aggressive officers that knocked in the door and set off concussion grenades around an 11-year-old girl. We ask the city council encourage our representatives to investigate this. At the local level, we would like the city council to set up a sanctuary fund so that targeted individuals can access resources in the wake of an emergency like this for living expenses, counseling, and home repair. Santa Cruz has gone almost as far as it can with legal resistance and we now call on the council to take the next step into fiscal assistance. This is what we are requesting from you as our elected officials, but we also know that your power is limited and we can't only rely on you to get what the change that we want. So we're also calling on our fellow members of the Santa Cruz community to become more active. It won't be just the actions of our elected officials that shift the tide of violent racist policies and actions, even if they do everything they can, the bulk of the work will remain in our hands. From Martin Luther King to Cesar Chavez to Emma Goldman, it's always been true that the people were the ultimate power that changed the course of history. Now is our time to not simply reference those leaders, but to honor them and our fellow human beings by acting. So please join with us and each other to build activated empowered communities that can defend and care for all of us. And if you wanna learn more, we're doing trainings on legal observation and civil disobedience in the upcoming months. So please email rapidresponse.sc at riseup.net for more information. Thank you very much. And next I'll invite up Vicki Winters representing San, Sanctuary Santa Cruz. Hello everyone, my name is Vicki Winters. I'm here represent, today representing Sanctuary Santa Cruz. And just waiting for the slide to come up. You mind going ahead and pausing her time? I see it over here. Just to let you know about our organization. We'll go ahead and pause your time. You'll be given four minutes, but we wanna make sure that we're fully prepared. Do you think that would be the... It's up to you. If you would like, we could... I have it in a handout form that I could give to you, but so I can just start. Why don't we go ahead and pause for a moment and we could either have IT come and then... Oh, okay, perfect. We'll restart your time. Okay, sorry. Technology, that would be easier, but it's always harder. There, yay, thank you. So as I said, I represent Sanctuary Santa Cruz, which is a coalition of organizations whose goal is to make Santa Cruz a welcoming place for all residents. So we support the right of all immigrants to whatever their status, to all the benefits enjoyed by other residents. And we oppose all deportations of the presence of immigration authorities in our community. And we support the right of all people to manage their own personal information so that no one is forced to disclose their immigration status. And as we've gotten a letter from the neighbors and you've heard about the overwhelming disproportionate use of force, just some elements I wanna highlight out of there that I've heard is that HSI agents were in the community doing surveillance several days before the raid, which is concerning to me, and that there is a lieutenant on the police force that meets with DHS representatives. And I'm just wondering how that cooperation takes place, is that a regular contact? And then I just wanna point out the overview, pull back a little bit and see that this is the second time that we've had this type of HSI raid in our community and a similar narrative that it was only criminal enforcement while at the same time then later it comes out that immigration enforcement was involved. And then if you look deeper, this has happened in the past three February. So it's just an odd pattern that every year we have this reminder that we are basically the city cannot keep out these forces. And I wanna give you some background. I feel like a lot of us who aren't directly impacted by the immigration enforcement don't really understand how it works. And I want you to know that Homeland Security investigations is ICE. It is not separate from ICE as kind of a narrative that was emerging that Homeland Security does separate things from ICE. They are part of ICE, they're under its direct authority and immigration enforcement is part of its mandate. They conduct immigration enforcement whenever they are out in the community. And criminalization of immigrants is ICE policy. It's our, this administration's policy. I mean, we see it over and over again. The association of immigrants with crime. It happens with every rally, with every speech of our president and it's baked into the structure of the Department of Homeland Security where we brought immigration which is just kind of a bureaucratic paperwork type of thing. We brought it into this agency that is to do with criminal enforcement and threats to our homeland. And then this administration has amped up that narrative to dial it to 11. And then we've also seen in recent days actually that how the demonization of immigrants is part of the organizational culture of ICE and HSI. The deputy special agent in charge of the San Francisco office of Homeland Security investigations who may well have been involved in the planning or execution of this raid is now being investigated for some of his social media posts that are spreading conspiracy theories about immigrants. And also it has emerged in national media reports over the past few days and weeks that ICE and HSI is now targeting activists and journalists including US citizens for anti-Trump activities and for some of the human rights attorneys that are helping migrants at the border. So it's very concerning that this agency is doing surveillance in our community. So ICE is a federal agency. What can city officials do? You know, you're welcome to submit your slides. Your time is up at this point but feel free to submit your slides and we can review those. Okay. Thank you. And I would encourage you to look at the matching funds available in the Vera Institute Safe Network. Thank you. Thank you. Okay, so now would be an opportunity for us to hear from the community. If you're interested in addressing the council on this item, please line up as you are to my left and you'll be given two minutes. My name is Jane Doyle and I'm here as a member of the Community Action Board. I'm also part of Sanctuary Santa Cruz and I support everything that was said. You know, I'm going to make a slightly different suggestion to add into it as when I'm done. I want to talk about what sanctuary means and it means it's a social concept and it means a place of safety and protection. And many years ago, I was living in a different city and I always thought of my home as my sanctuary. I never felt unafraid there. Until one night I was home alone and I heard a sound at the back of the house so I walked back there and standing in my back room was a man I'd never seen before and he lunged for me and tried to grab me and I screamed and that made him stop and he turned around and ran out. I never, I lived there for three more years. I never felt safe. I was an adult. I wasn't a small child. I spoke the language and I was still terrified and I carried that fear with me every time I was alone in that house and that is part of what really bothers me about what's happening in Santa Cruz because we are a sanctuary city but we're not. In reality, we're not. We have a climate of fear in this city, in particular neighborhoods, although as has been indicated and you all know it spreads all over the city depending on what's going on and I think that we need to address that. I understand how difficult it is for chief mills and Sheriff Hart and the people who work for them to say no to the feds. They made that point over and over. I mean, the feds have made that point. However, I really do think that there are ways that we can possibly, it's at the end. Yes, your time is up but if you do have written remarks that you'd like to submit, we can review those here. I will have to send it to you. I wasn't prepared. Okay, thank you. So next speaker and you'll have up to two minutes as well. Good evening, my name is Regina Langhatt. I'm a professor at UC Santa Cruz in the psychology department and also the lead author on a policy brief from the Society for Community Research and Action which is a division of the American Psychological Association. In this policy brief, we review 30 years of psychological research on the effects of raids, deportation and forced family separation. After raids, targeted communities become fearful and mistrust public institutions. Many stop using social, health and public services, children withdraw from school. Civic engagement decreases and with it, social isolation increases which has negative physical and mental health effects even years later. The negative psychosocial effects on children are even greater. Taking into consideration media reports after the sea bright raid, the city's current ordinance and the literature, I make the following six recommendations. One, law enforcement should develop a protocol so if someone is brought in for questioning, officers ascertain how long the person has already been detained to ensure access to food every few hours and water hourly and to ensure civil rights are not being violated. Two, the city should have a protocol to check the legality of warrants locally. Three, have law enforcement call at least one city council member in the event of a raid rather than only emailing the council as it is listed in the ordinance. This will convey the information more quickly. Four, provide tangible support and emotional resources for targeted communities including mental health and healing services and services that build community trust. And five, create a department dedicated to supporting immigrant community members. This department could direct individuals to appropriate resources and listen and respond to the challenges experienced by immigrants. And finally, develop an overarching community health equity plan that prioritizes equal access to mental health and wellbeing, education, healthcare, and civic engagement opportunities for all community members regardless of their status. Thank you for your attention. Thank you. Hi, I'm Michael Gasera. I'm a member of Sanctuary Santa Cruz. I wanna talk about messaging and message control, message discipline. We are talking about what, we've heard the word terror a few times and we understand now that ICE and HSI are basically terrorist organizations. And when we deal with terrorist organizations, we have to be very careful about how we spread their message. The easiest thing to do is to say things like, well, as we understand it, this was a criminal case. But this can go very badly wrong. And let me cite one example from our neighboring sister city to the south. Where the raid that happened in February, 2018, mentioned briefly by Vicky, involved a family being stopped on their way to school just outside the border of Watsonville. A city council member contacting Watsonville PD and getting basically ICE's rumor and mounted to a rumor. It ended up being a lie that this was actually, I won't repeat what I said because I would then be doing what I said we shouldn't be doing. She in turn spread this to Facebook. Where it was seen by possibly hundreds of people before she realized her mistake and took it down. But the damage had been done. This was in fact not true at all of the man who had been detained. This was not a criminal case of the type that she was asserting. So I'm not talking about censorship, but I think we need to be careful about how we pass on the message that ICE and HSI want us to pass on. They have a big budget for this, right? We should be coming up with alternative narratives for what's going on. And that includes community, city officials and police. Thanks. Thank you. Good afternoon again. I'm Ron Pomerance. I'm here on behalf of the ACLU of Santa Cruz County. And I'll read our statement to you. Every resident of our city is entitled to be safe and secure. We can never sacrifice anyone's civil rights and liberties. Coercion and intimidation and threats must never, never be tolerated. The actions of the Federal Homeland Security's Investigations on February 15th of this year in our city appeared more like a military operation than a civil matter, which has not only unnecessarily violated the safety and security of the neighborhood, but most likely violated the family civil liberties and rights. Using flash bang grenades and a battering ram, ransacking a home with children at four in the morning on specious grounds to serve a warrant, strikes us as falling well outside the norm of honoring our constitutionality of protected and cherished rights. We request that the city council and or the city manager direct the police chief along with the city attorney to further investigate this matter by all means necessary. If the investigation warrants number one, request the police chief to write and implement policies to assure that the Santa Cruz police department will attempt to inhibit such operations in the future and two, send letters from the city council to our county, state and federal representatives to make them aware of what transpired and to request their assistance demanding that HSI respect everyone's safety and civil rights. We will work with you. Thank you for your time and thoughtful consideration signed by Peter Galbloom, our chair. Thank you. Thank you. My name is Dave Willis and I don't agree like the chief said that there was nothing they could do or something. I feel like if the chief knows ahead of time or our department knows, then they can be there and stand there and observe what these people are doing. If those people come in here and they telling the chief, well, we're here for this reason, this week we gonna do and they lying to him, I feel like that what was done is straight up a crime. Who puts hoods over people's heads? They do that in Guatemala, South Salvador, not here in America. Just that alone can traumatize you forever for life. I feel like we have a city lawyer, then each act that those people did, we need to file charges on them people for each charge like you would do for a citizen. And if you can't do nothing about it, at least you letting them know something. I feel like this, there was a place called Germany. We're close because people said, well, first they came for them and then they came for them and then one day they came for me. We're there, we're that close. You all are our government. You don't let nobody come in and push you around. You stand up for us, you stand up for America. We don't play, we don't play that here. We have a legal department, do something legally. Maybe nothing happens after, but at least you doing something and they like gonna think it over. Chief, you gotta stand there and you observe if you ain't taking part. I see officers walking around all the time. Therefore you got time to stand there and watch what these people do. And if you let them come in here and lie to you and you accept what they say again. Thank you. Hi, my name is Hannah Rogers. I work for Community Action Board. So I'm here on their behalf this afternoon. We just wanted as an organization to thank you for putting this on the council agenda. To my knowledge, it's a bit unprecedented and we really appreciate actually wanting to do something about it and generating some concrete action items like, you know, taking action with our federal representatives. And we also wanted to mention as far as these community conversations going forward, we absolutely as an organization want to be a part of those. Helping envision a way where we can actually create a city, a true sanctuary city or county rather where people can feel safe to live their daily lives. And hopefully this envisioning process with you all through the community conversations can lead to some concrete actions. And speaking of concrete actions, we just wanted to update you all and the public that some of our legal immigration services have expanded to North County. So we do have the Santa Cruz County Immigration Project which is based out of Watsonville and do some recent increase in grant funding. We're able to expand our legal services to the day worker center in Live Oak as well as the Davenport Resource Service Center in the very northern part of our county. We also have been able to expand to do a little bit more extensive case management for families who are vulnerable to detention. So that's before and after a family member has been detained. So we really just wanted to make the public aware of those services since it's a little bit of support we can provide the community at this point. So thank you. Hello, my name is Elise Kazby and I'm a local activist. I just wanted to say some political comments. I think it's really important for us to come to terms with who DHS is. I myself need to come up to speed on DHS. DHS, and my understanding was founded under the George W. Bush administration. The problem with that administration is that they managed to look extremely civil and extremely kind of mainstream. That was almost 20 years ago and now we have Trump. The reason I'm talking about this is that if you had certain bodies of knowledge, like if you had a well-informed background on certain issues, you understood certain things. Like there were never any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. And the reason I'm bringing this up and I just hope people will give me a pass here is it is very important and it is because we have been veering toward a fascist state at least since 2000 with the Bush coup of the presidency. Those of us who are deeply interested in voting rights who are deeply knowledgeable compared to some people, maybe not experts. I'm not trying to uphold myself as a PhD scholar. But the coup, the George W. Bush coup of 2000 was just that. And when you look into the history of his father and the establishment of the CIA, which is another extremely suspect organization which has led to destabilization of countries around the world. So the reason I'm bringing this in is because I do think that these things are interrelated. Fascism is an ethical mode of reasoning. Some people just believe you have to have a strong hand, the fatherland, et cetera. But we need to always remember that even though this might be a so-called legitimate form, we have to fight it. Thank you, Mayor and City Council. My name's Harry Snyder. I live at 510 Wyndham Street around the corner from the incident. I want to, I don't represent the community. I don't think any single person can, but the community is very concerned about three things. One, whatever can be done for the family that was involved and their immediate neighbors should be done. We're very concerned about that. That should not be left out of this discussion. Two, we all believe in the rule of law and we want laws enforced and we want to make that clear. But we also want to avoid excessive use of force in our neighborhood, creating fear, trauma, and uncertainty. And so the request, and I want to shout out to Councilmember Glover, Crohn, and Sandy Brown who've all been at our house. My son-in-law Raymond Mendoza could not be here today. He's coaching his daughters, my granddaughters, cross-country bicycle team. And so he had to beg out. But we also appreciate Chief Welch who came to the meeting at the second meeting we had and described to us, and I don't want to take any liberties with what you said, so I'm glad you're here. How extreme the violence was for a paper warrant, which was something I'd never heard before. So it's because of that verification of what we in experts saw and heard that we feel that we're asking for these three things, that the Council express a denunciation of the events that the mayor is authorized to write a letter to the representatives identified, the federal representatives, and that three, a community conversation be held. All of these are interim steps. Thank you. Thank you. Hi there, my name is Miriam Stombler and I'm here as a sea-bright neighbor and a friend of a family and a retired government attorney. And I'm also here as a member of the Santa Cruz County Child Care Safety Plan Coalition. This is unfortunately an important time to let you know that we help families prepare free of charge safety plans for their children in case of an unfortunate event like this. You've heard testimony today at the earlier hearing about the extreme human suffering inflicted by this raid and we need to keep that foremost in our minds because if nothing else, we are all humans and we are members of a shared community. Our government is supposed to protect us, not terrorize us. And there is no hyperbole that you're hearing here. The people in our group have spoken with members of the Federal Public Defender's Office who are horrified about this event. They said the manner in which Homeland Security executed the search warrant was unprecedented and clearly indefensible on the face of the warrant, which was for what the chief described as paper crimes. Rather than protecting officers in the public, which is typically foremost importance in executing a warrant, this was done in a manner that only increased the risk that someone would be hurt. And indeed, this family was deeply harmed by this. Deploying 12 vehicles and dozens of officers for a 4 a.m. raid when a simple knock on the door would have sufficed is simply unconscionable. And as a lawyer and a taxpayer, I'm incensed that our public resources are being squandered and abused in this way. There appears to be, thank you. There appears to be no legitimate law enforcement rationale for this conduct so we can only conclude that it was done specifically to terrorize and intimidate this family and this community. We will not be intimidated and we are relying on you to amplify our voices and our outrage and to demand accountability from law enforcement. Thank you. Good evening, I'm Sally Arnold. I'm a Santa Cruz resident and there's not much I can add to what everybody else has said. They've given you many specific suggestions that I think would be wise to take up. I'm a person of great privilege in this community. I'm a citizen, I'm educated, I'm white. I have economic privilege and I am frightened. If we let this happen with DHS on an immigrant family, when will it be the sheriff? When will it be the police? When will it be my house? When will it be your house? I mean, it's an immigrant issue for sure, but it's a bigger issue. It's an issue of violent police oppression. And if you let it go with this time and it's gonna keep happening, I'm terrified, we have a bear cat in this community. What's that for? We have to really think about this in a larger context. It's about law enforcement violence and we need the current, our local law enforcement's trying to walk a line between the feds and taking care of our community. That's a hard line, I appreciate it, but frankly, everybody's getting tired with this brush. And I feel like as leaders of the community, we need you to stand up and we need you to do absolutely everything that you can, recognizing that what you can do is limited when it's right now the feds, but it's not always gonna be the feds if we don't draw a line right now. So thank you for taking the time to hear about this and I really hope you will think about this in a larger context. Are there any additional members of the public who would like to address us at this time? Okay, seeing none. We'll go ahead and return to the Council for Discussion, Action and Deliberation. That's remember Glover. Yeah, sorry. Thank you Mayor and thank you to everyone that came out to speak and share your perspectives as well as to share what it is you'd like to see us do and action steps that we can take. I'm sure that we'll have a lot of conversation about this or maybe not and it'll be really straightforward and cut and dry, but with that, I'd like to make a motion. I'd like to make a motion to instruct staff to return or let me rephrase this. I'd like to make a motion to request the Mayor to write a letter co-signed by the City Council to the state ICE agencies and offices as well as the federal government and our federal representatives to push for an investigation into the raid and to expel those that were involved or knowing in the process of what happened. Then I'd additionally like to make a motion to instruct staff to return on April 9th, 2019 with the following, which would be a report on the allocating of fiscal resources for the assistance of setting up a sanctuary fund that will address living expenses and home repair for those impacted by this and past and or future raids to provide tangible support and emotional resources to the affected and the development of a community health equity plan to explore the matching funds from the Vera Institute Safe Network and matching funds. Also for the police department and our police chief to develop a set of protocols that identify the length of detention as well as the access individuals have had to have access to food and water, to also have a protocol that is to check warrants when they come in for raids in our community to check their validity and the ability to be exercised so we're not caught off guard like this last time, to amend the sanctuary ordinance to direct staff to call the council directly when the raid is about to take place so that we can act more efficiently and more quickly and to establish a community conversation that includes the city manager's office, the police chief, city council, sheriff Jim Hart, the community action board, the sanctuary organization, ER, the affected community members, and others that should be selected by the affected community members. So we have a motion by council member Glover. Is there a second? I will second it. Okay, second by council member Cron. Any council member Matthews? I'd like to just speak on process. We had an agenda item submitted, co-signed by council member Glover and I was prepared to deal with that and then this is a whole list of new things and it's really difficult to process. Some of them I think I could readily agree with and others are just, I'm not prepared and it makes it difficult, particularly when it's the item that has been brought forth within the last few days and now we're asked to deal with something different. So, I'm sorry. I was just commenting that council member Glover's motion contains a lot of items that were never mentioned in the agenda report that he himself prepared just a few days ago and it's hard to having prepared myself to deal with the agenda item that we were given. There's so many items there. I'm frankly not prepared to act on them. I'll just add and then I'll go ahead and respond. I think one of the things I wanted to mention is there's been an ongoing effort since the first instance that took place that's been regional and there's been representation from the Watsonville city manager's office, the city council, education, cab, Monarch services, immigration projects, legal services, community ventures, looking at DACA support and other types of financial aid and we've found and acknowledged that this has been way, this is a regional challenge and outside the city's boundaries and having that partnership and ability to work regionally with these partners and services and how to respond as best as we can is in place and I do believe that there was a meeting following this instance and I'm not quite sure if we received notice of that meeting, I know of it because of the education relationship that I have and there's the appointments that I believe include Council Member Crone and Council Member Glover to attend those. So in terms of an existing infrastructure, really looking at how do we regionally respond and come together as a community to address, to not only hopefully come up with policies to prevent but also come up with strategies for support, many of which I think encompass a lot of the elements that are in the policy brief and some elements that were mentioned in I think your policy proposal. So I just wanna be mindful of existing movements that are happening and how we can maintain our relationship or potentially expand that relationship. So it's just, I think that was just my, that's sort of my first kind of comment because I think a lot of this could be really enhanced by that partnership. Okay, Council Member Crone. Absolutely, thank you. So I just wanna clarify, just so that there's no misunderstanding, the only action items that we would take from my motion would be be under the area right here, which would be authorize the mayor or request that the mayor send a letter but also add that it would be co-signed by the city council to the state offices, the federal government as well as our representatives listed here and then the other one is the establishment of the community conversation which is C. The other ones are requesting for the staff to come back on April 9th with an analysis and a report which could include some of the things that the mayor just mentioned because up until right now, I don't know about anyone else but this is the first time I've heard about them. So I think it would be great for the community to know what's going on county-wide. It'll also give us the opportunity to get a full understanding of what we can do fiscally to support some of the things. And with regards to the motion itself, one of the main reasons that I personally wanted to put this on the agenda was to hear what the community needed and wanted to change. These are all great but we put these in an agenda report and we're not trying to speak for the community. So after being able to hear some of the very specific requests, some could say demands because of the urgency of what's going on from the community, those have been worked into the motion but to be requested to return on April 9th so that we can take action on that and give you plenty of time to review and prepare. So everyone else? Council Member Brown, Vice Mayor Cummings. So I too am wanting to be responsive to the suggestions and requests made by the community and think that having a start, get us towards that, having that conversation is a good idea. I would like more time to digest all of that before, for example, saying bring us an ordinance for April 9th or an ordinance amendment but some kind of report so we can continue this conversation, keep it moving. At the same time, I don't want to delay moving forward on having this community conversation and getting those letters out to our federal representatives and to DHS. So I'm just hoping we can find a way to make sure that happens and I wanted to ask staff if April, for the other piece that Council Member Glover suggests is April 9th realistic to come back? I mean, you could ask, I can also just say one of the things that's been really challenging for me in trying to set the agendas for upcoming meetings is having short turnarounds in terms of report backs and what happens is often items that were scheduled, whether it be informative or policy directive have to go. So I have a lot of hesitation on that personally and would prefer to have the process ensue and then have it come back at a time that made the most sense given that we could take specific action as you mentioned prior and I'll let Martin Bernal expand if you'd like. Yeah, did you pass out the list? I didn't see it, so. I have it here, I can send it to Bonnie if you wouldn't mind. That'd be helpful. I think we'd have to look at the scope a little better, to be honest. We can certainly look at the list and then see what are the items that we can bring back by the 9th and just get a little bit more definition. There was some, like the ordinance, I can't recall whether you suggested having the ordinances come back or just an analysis of the ordinances changes and that sort of thing. Yeah, it was a, sorry. So maybe if you give me that list, I'll be helpful, I can look at it a little bit better. Nice to meet you. First I want to start by saying that in no way do I support what happened on that evening and I'm really glad that we're addressing this in a timely manner and that we're trying to, have a conversation around this because obviously this is not something that we can have as it's something that's ongoing without having people in our community feel like they're protected. One thing, I think that the list that was just brought forward, I do also have some concerns with timing and the different issues and how we can prioritize certain things that were brought forward. For example, trying to reach out to, reaching out to our federal representatives and trying to set up supports. It's just, I'll just reiterate what other folks said. It just seems like a lot for me at this point in time. Not that I don't support anything that the things were brought forward. I think one thing that needs to, the conversation that needs to be had in addition to what was brought forward is what do we see the role of our local law enforcement playing in these types of scenarios. One thing that was brought up from this conversation is the fact that because we have asked our police force to stand down and not support any types of activities like these, we lose an opportunity for our local police force to actually be able to document what's happening and to be involved in the process. In addition, the more that we don't allow, and I was actually gonna ask a question of Chief Mills at one point which was what is the federal government's obligation to inform us about these types of activities because one of the things I get concerned about is that if the more that we increase and tell local law enforcement that we don't want them involved with that city or county whether or not that then creates an opportunity for these types of law enforcement agencies to take people further out of our county where we'll have less oversight of what's actually going on where the people are, how long are they being detained, what kind of conditions they're under. And so in addition to what was brought forward, I would also want to have an opportunity where we can have a discussion around how we should see our local law enforcement involved in these types of activities with specific regards to being able to document what actually is happening so that we have record of what's going on. Council Member Mays. First of all, I just wanna say I'm really sorry for what your family's gone through and you're right, this should not be happening in Santa Cruz. So I appreciate you coming here today. I know it must be a really hard time for you. So in addition, I would just, I'm supportive of really diving into this as a community and making sure we get this right. I also appreciate Council Member Glover for bringing this to our agenda. And there's so much, there's a variety of some really great ideas, policy objectives, as well as a multi-layered need to communicate federal, state, to our elected officials. I would suggest we also should be potentially communicating to the governor and the attorney general as well. This is a big project, we wanna get it right. We wanna make sure that we provide the breadth of policy that we should put in place for our community. I'm just wondering, Council Member Glover, if you would potentially entertain, convening a council subcommittee that maybe could sort of sort through a lot of this maybe with staff so that we are assured to get both the regional efforts. I just heard a lot of, there's a lot of great resource in our community, it sounds like. And it is a regional, it's a regional need. And I think our neighbors to the south and to the north and even down into Monterey County, I think there's a lot of good work being done. I'm wondering if you would entertain potentially a council subcommittee working on this and bringing some of these things back in association with staff that might expand the ability to get more conversations going, learn more and potentially get this information to us in a way that's very comprehensive. Council Member Glover. I would be open to adding that to the motion for the establishment of a subcommittee. I'm just, and I'd love to be selected to be on that subcommittee as well. I'm just a little concerned about the time associated with it. I know that the community and the individuals and the families and the neighbors would like to see action as opposed to just analysis and study. So if we can have a solid timeline associated with that that isn't three to six months, but is one to two months as far as that subcommittee turnaround to come back with recommendations as well as the structure of the community conversation, then I'd be happy to add that to the motion. Yeah, my intent would be that it would be a short, with some of these immediate actions, especially the correspondence needs, but looking at sort of some of the ordinances and things like that. But no, not something taking months to do, certainly as rapid a response as possible. Yeah, I'd accept that a friendly amendment if that's what it is. Okay. So council member Matthews Brown and then vice mayor. I see the correspondence as something that can happen. Pronto. In terms of item C, the community conversation, I read that to read that we would ask that our federal representatives take the lead in that, which I strongly support. Working with these other community partners and others that weren't listed here, but have kind of come up and the schools played a big role in the past and definitely they end a very productive one. Health agencies played a really big role. We do have a county Latino Affairs Commission. The city has two appointees to that. I mean, I think we can get a lot of people who have an active interest in this and would want to be part of that conversation. So I hope that that would be the direction there, that the community conversation lead comes from our federal representative's office and that we actively as a city participate but take a more regional approach and the countywide group that you mentioned would also, I would think take a lead in that as well. Okay, council member Brown. So I also like the idea of having a subcommittee work and I think two months is realistic, particularly given it's gonna take some time to have this community conversation. More ideas may come out of that, probably not by April 9th, would we have all of the good, the benefit of that conversation as well. But with respect to the item C and the community conversation, I understand council member Matthew's your point. I'm just wondering if, to the extent that that leads to potential delays, like if we have to put in a formal request to congress member Panetta's office, have it go back to Washington and see if they really want to take the lead on this. I don't want to delay this, I would like to say that we're willing to kind of host it but we'd like for them to get on board and take a leadership role so that it moves along, I guess I just, I don't want to lose that by saying, well, we'll send in and out and request that they do this and then what if they don't? Yeah, I mean, they have a district office, we have a close relationship, I think let's shoot for that and be as helpful as we can. Okay, council member Cronin, anything you'd like to say? Yeah, I would think that I don't have a lot of faith that it's gonna take a short period of time in working through council member Panetta's office, although I would like to and I think they've been effective so far. I think it would be something that the subcommittee could also incorporate into their work and push that process along and make sure this community conversation actually happens and work with the congress member's office locally or Washington and who we're gonna invite and that we definitely don't leave out the neighbors because I think that's very important for them to be represented at this meeting. I know it also stirred some stuff at Galt School where some of the kids go and so there's that issue as well that I would want represented, but I agree with the subcommittee and I'm happy to serve too if I wanna nominate people or how the mayor wants to. Okay, vice mayor, did you have additional comments? Yeah, I was just gonna suggest that in that letter that we express the urgency given what's happened in our community because we really wanna make sure that this is not something that's delayed and that we actually get a response because our community's been very negatively impacted by these events and so that's just one thing that I was gonna suggest with the letter that's being addressed. The other point and issue and I guess this is a question for city attorney is whether or not there's the ability for the city to look into this event and the potential use of excessive force by the Homeland Security agents. I would say that if that's the council direction I would be happy to do that but I can't really say in advance what the results of that would be or how successful that effort would be because I don't know in advance if I can obtain pertinent evidence that we would have to use in order to analyze that to provide a legal opinion on it. So I'm not confident that I would be able to provide you with a comprehensive report that would be a valuable piece of information for you to have but if that's the council's direction then we'd certainly do our best to put that together. Okay, okay. So one of the things that I'll just, if I could add one of the great things about this community is having had attended some of the meetings in the past is how incredibly dedicated our community partners are. So I do really want to emphasize how important it is for us to mobilize all of the different resources that we have and just the incredible services that they're providing to support those that are most vulnerable in our community. And then I also will just add that I think we should definitely work with our community liaison, Peter and most recently I met with our Mexico Consulate in general, Mr. Carlos Martinez and hearing all the different services that they're providing to our region and access and his interest in partnering. I think he could be a big partner in the community conversation as well. So there's a lot we already have in place. There's more that we can do. And I am supportive of the idea of having a subcommittee really dive into a little bit deeper. For the purposes of this item moving forward now is it the general consensus of the council to form the subcommittee and then have the committee return or is there specific things that you would like to have move forward at this time and then have other elements come back at a future time? Okay, Council Member Matthews and then Council Member Glover. It makes most sense to me to form the subcommittee and have them look at the ideas that have been presented and come forward with recommendations for priorities. Council Member Glover. I'd be happy to structure the motion so that we can move on the actionable item like the letter specifically since we have a general or very specific idea of where we can send that and then the establishment of a subcommittee to address the following to analyze the feasibility, fiscal impacts and implementation of the community conversation, the fiscal resources to be applied to community support, the law enforcement protocol development and the amendment to the sanctuary ordinance. Okay. And just say and other ideas that were presented from the, there were some ideas that came from the community. And more input from the community. And also if we could have in there, if that's, oh, the community conversation is a separate item, isn't it? I mean, it could be included in the subcommittee work because then put it together. It's down to the very bottom. It's that last one. That was a little bit different than the language here. I mean, we can take these representatives also because I noticed that it doesn't have the liaison listed there. It has a whole bunch of people that aren't listed. Yeah. So perhaps the subcommittee could look at that. Yeah, that's what I was thinking. Okay, okay. And then in terms of clarity for the investigation and expel those who were involved if appropriate or if, I mean, I'm just in terms of what that means or how that would be articulated. I'm not clear. Well, what we heard from the community was that they wanted there to be accountability for the individuals and officials slash leaders and management that were involved in not only the authorization of it, but also the officers that participated in it. I'm not sure how that, I mean, even if it's just a statement saying that we want to see that happen from the city and that people need to take accountability for the impact they've had on our community, that could be substantial and just the symbolic statement of it, but just going off of what the request from the community were. One of the things, and then I'll, and one of the things that was in the general report was the expression of dismay and denunciation of the approach and the heavy-handed tactics. And I think that to me, I think encompasses that more so than that would in terms of languaging. I agree, I agree. I was comfortable with the language here expressing great concerns with the oppressive approach used. And I would tweak a little bit, requesting federal investigation and greater oversight those two things. I think it's a little overreaching for us to tell them to expel, and we want to get the intention behind accountability and especially that. I could accept that. That might come out in the community conversation too. That kind of action, I think. Okay, so then if that's the case, are you then suggesting that that be just rolled into the community, I mean the council subcommittee to explore what the contents of the letter would be? No. No. Although we can do that. No, okay, okay. The letter is straightforward. So I think we're clear, okay. We could get that out soon, yeah. But could we change the language? I think the language, if we could, if you're comfortable, which I think I heard you say, it would be essentially what was written in the agenda report under AMB for the components of the language for the letter. That includes investigation. Right, as long as it includes investigation. And I think, right. Okay. Wonderful. Mayor, I have three quick questions for the police chief just before we vote. Okay. Go ahead. Chief Mills, these are questions that came up again and again, I just wanted to let people get, possibly respond to it. Is it common not to have people named on a warrant and then the warrant that was served even though you didn't have the names of the individuals that were then detained and whose house it was? The search warrants are served on the property. Oh. So you may not name the person in the warrant. Okay. And does the lieutenant in the Santa Cruz police meet with DHS reps often, every once in a while? No, we do not. And the last question is, why can't PD tell electeds about the raid before it happens? Several reasons. One is operational security. They wouldn't tell us then if they were going to do a raid. They are under no obligation legally. I don't believe to do that. I believe it is their policy that they do, but they can subvert that policy under the auspices of operational security. Okay. Thank you. And I also want to thank you for joining us at the meeting in the neighborhood and listening to folks and sharing your own thoughts on it. I really appreciate it. It was my pleasure. Chief Mills, I apologize. Vice Mayor Cummings had a question earlier. Yeah, I just asked her. I think you answered it, but just to reiterate. So there's no federal obligation for Homeland Security to notify us when they're coming in our community. I was told by the Special Agent in Charge at a meeting with Cal Chiefs that it is their policy to do so. But again, under operational security, they wouldn't do that. Like for instance, when they were doing surveillance ahead of the raid, we were not informed of that. And if they're doing an immigration stop or another type of investigation, they don't necessarily inform us of that. It would be if they're gonna do a large event such as the raid that took place because what we don't want is for us to get a radio calls all of a sudden of gunfire in a neighborhood, you know, the explosive devices or the diversionary devices that were being thrown. And then we go rushing in, there's a bunch of people standing there with rifles that may or may not be in uniforms that we would recognize. So that's the purpose of them notifying us. One more question. Do you see any benefit to us having our local police involved in these types of events for the purposes of documenting what's happening? I think that becomes a balancing issue that council needs to weigh and give us direction on to be there, to be able to witness what took place is one thing that way you have somebody locally that can testify to that. But the counter to that is if we are there then does that make us complicit in the event? And I would want to be very careful not to do that. You know, one of the things that we have, I have as well as many other chiefs have argued with DHS about is their use of the word police on their uniforms. And they refuse to change that. Well, so many people think that is the police doing these things when it's actually not the police at all. It's a law enforcement, but a federal law enforcement. A little bit different than the police. Let me put that in the letter too. Sorry. I actually was gonna ask if we could include in the letter language around Homeland Security. Our communities desire to have Homeland Security identify themselves when they're conducting these types of raids. Oh, near. Apparatus? Yeah. Yeah, well, I mean, so that they're not labeling themselves as either police or coming into the community with unidentifiable clothing so that when they're entering these premises, people can know that they're from a federal institution and that they're not just random people running in with guns into their house. All right. Okay, thank you. So at this point, we have a motion, I believe by Council Member Glover, seconded by Council Member Crone. I think we're clear on the motion. No, we're not clear. We're combining the two. Is that what the end result was? The end result was to have the letter move forward with the input in. So was it the staff recommended one, the initial one, plus a subcommittee? And plus a subcommittee. Made a subcommittee that would then do the others. Okay, so all those in favor? I think somebody mentioned Council Member Myers, the Governor and the Attorney General will be included in that list also. Okay. That would be in addition to the other representatives. With copies too, the letter copies too. Is that what you're thinking? Yeah, just CC'd. Sure, also, okay. Accepted. Okay, okay, okay. If I could just comment, there are some nuances that maybe offline, I could help write with. I think that it could maybe bring some clarity to what took place and maybe get the right representatives here that I'd be happy to work with you on that. Thank you very much. That would be very helpful. Okay, all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay, that passes unanimously. Mayor, before we move on. Okay, so at this point, oh. Before we move on, just one more thing, or two more things under this agenda item. So something that was mentioned during the community statements was the request for a structuring of a body or commission or something that would address the protections of immigrants in Santa Cruz. I understand that there's a county model with cab and other ones, but I wanted to pass this around. I've been contacted by many community members concerned about the issues of racism, bigotry, discrimination and persecution. So we working with them came up with a proposal for the establishment of a Human Rights Commission here in Santa Cruz, which would address the causes and problems resulting from prejudice, ignorance, bigotry and discrimination within the city of Santa Cruz. The Human Rights Commission will function pursuant to the guidelines set forth by Santa Cruz City Council policy. The HRC members will consist of representatives and unbiased members of the community that can effectively advocate and show a commitment to the advancements of human and civil rights. Just to skip forward a little bit, the commission will be made up of subcommittees and the subcommittees will focus on protection against race-based discrimination, protection on homelessness, population rights, documented population, undocumented population rights, committee on the protection of the rights of people with disabilities, committee on the protection of the rights of environmental sustainability, the justice-impacted children and the education system. So I'd love to direct staff to work with the subcommittee to develop the feasibility around the establishment of the commission. I'm gonna go ahead and pause you first so I can actually see our city attorney stepping in. It sounds to me like that is a topic that should be brought back to the council as an agenda item, and then the council can discuss giving that specific direction. Okay, could I see that as part of this item? But that would certainly be something that you could ask to be brought back. So in compliance with the Brown Act, it isn't appropriate to have this discussion at this time. Absolutely. So then could I move to add this for discussion on the April 9th agenda? You can do that at the meeting calendar which is our next agenda item. Oh, okay, well, I'll wait then. Okay, so we'll go ahead and close that agenda item and now we're on to the agenda item number 19th which is the meeting calendar and it'll ask if our city clerk has any additions or changes. Just the March 19th study session which you all know about but other than that. Okay, so now it would be the time if you'd wanted to make that motion. Absolutely, so thank you, Mayor. I'd like to make a motion that we return on the April 9th agenda to discuss the creation or formation of a human rights commission and whether to instruct the subcommittee or other staff members to work on coming back with a report at a future date. Okay, so there's a motion by council member Glover. Is there a second? Let me wait for a second. Sure. Yeah, no problem. Okay, is there a second for that motion? Well, I was gonna ask a question about it. Second. Seeing no second. Second. Okay, so there's a motion by council member Glover. There's a second by council member Crone. I, with the meeting calendar, it's general protocol that, and there's a informational memo. I don't know if that's going out to this council but I know that was crafted by our city attorney that these requests go through the mayor prior to them being requested at the city calendar and agendizing items by city calendar really does tie my hands in terms of how I can operate the balance of other agenda items. So I personally don't support that process but it is an avenue in which the council can move forward on agendizing items. So it's not about the content for me, it's about the process. So I won't be supportive of that. Vice mayor. I think it would be good to, like everything that's in this and I think that it's a lot of things that we definitely should be addressing with our community and getting more community involvement. I do however, I know that a lot of what was mentioned in the previous proposal, we decided to form the subcommittee under the knowledge of knowing that it generally will push other things off of our agenda and that we should be working with the mayor and with the staff to look at how we can best put this on the calendar so we can dedicate meaningful time and not push other things off. I'm in support of this, but I think that it would be good if we bring this to a gender review and we can work with council member level to find a time that would be suitable for putting it on our calendar. Okay, council member Brown. Yeah, I agree. I'm absolutely supportive of this. It makes me a little nervous to think about doing another potentially very large ask immediately. So the extent that we can figure out a way to fit this into the agenda in a timely manner, I feel good about that over just saying absolutely on the April 9th, but I don't want to lose track of it either. So I would like to see it come to us. Council member Matthews and then council member Knight. I'm just gonna chime in. I also am very curious about exploring this. I'm just wondering, yeah, if it is a strategic planning, kind of a strategic planning discussion for us. I think some of our commissions actually deserve maybe some broader exploration. So maybe this gets packaged into that process where there may be some commissions that are reoriented slightly based on today's more pressing needs. So I'm not supportive of it, but I'd like to either see it in our strategic planning discussion as a committee, as a council, or using the agenda process if possible. Council member Matthews and then vice mayor. Yeah, there's not a thought on here that I disagree with, but establishing a whole new commission is, as I think newer council members will learn a big commitment in terms of the staff's time, agendizing, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. And I think it would be worth sitting down and thinking, how do we incorporate these principles in some of our existing commissions, our existing programs, working with our community partners? I mean, for example, our community programs. To me, it's like climate action. I mean, it's a principle that we all have, but how to achieve this most effectively given the extraordinary expectations and workload we are putting on our staff with what we know will be an increasingly limited budget. And that's the challenge, I think. Okay, and then, okay. I just have one question for the city manager. I was just, sorry. I was just curious about the timing of the strategic planning meeting because I know this has come up a number of times today and I think that it would be really great for all of us to just have a sense of when that might be happening. Well, I certainly would like to get together with the mayor and the vice mayor as soon as possible too. We started the conversations and I think we just have been focused on other items, but I think it does make a lot of sense to refocus on getting that scheduled and getting the process put in place so that we can move forward with that. I think the idea, at least to get that process going so that you have something in place here moving forward. And if I can, I'll just add that. I do believe that there has been some progress that there will be an item coming forward. So before us is the meeting calendar. We have a motion. Yeah, I was just, I'm just great to get a temperature read of the group and in the desire to respect your wishes and the process so that we can make sure that you have enough time to coordinate with agenda stuff. I'd like to withdraw my motion and then I'll write an agenda report and submit it. Okay. Sometime later. So we, then do we need a motion to approve the meeting calendar? Before we leave, I have another item for the meeting calendar. I would like to make a motion to agendize for our March 19th meeting to schedule a discussion on moving our March 26th official meeting date to April 2nd. Okay. So we have a withdrawal of the first motion. We have a second motion to agendize on March 19th a discussion about changing the meeting calendar to cancel the March 26th meeting and schedule at April 2nd. I'll move it to April 2nd. Okay. I won't be able to attend, I'm out of town. Okay. I prefer to stick to the schedule that we've built our calendars around. I agree. Okay. So, is there a second? I have a conflict with the second as well. Okay. So that dies for a second. What's the date? Okay. So if there could be a motion to approve the meeting calendar. You don't need one. You don't need one. Nope. Okay. So we will reconvene at 7 p.m. for oral communications, which will take place from 7 to 7.30 before our evening item. All right. Good evening, everybody. Welcome. I'd like to get your attention. Okay. Thank you. So I want to welcome you to our 7 p.m. session of the March 12th, 2019 meeting of the city council. And I'd like to ask our clerk to please call the roll. Thank you, mayor. Council member is Cron. Here. Glover. Here. Meyers. Here. Brown. Here. Matthews. Here. Vice mayor coming. Here. Before we begin this evening session, I'd like to announce that we have overflow seating available at the civic auditorium. So if you would like to sit at the civic auditorium for overflow, please do so and go in that direction. So right now is an opportunity for oral communications. And oral communications is the opportunity for members of the community to speak to the council on items that are not listed on today's agenda. Are there any members of the public who are interested in speaking to the council on items that are not on today's agenda? By a show of hands? Okay, okay. So we'll go ahead and have you come forward. You'll be given two minutes. Oral communications will conclude at 7.35 so that we can bring our, if not before, so that we'll begin our evening session item. So please. Hello, mayor and council members. I, my name is Ted Rosseter and I'm here on behalf of SEIU to say thank you for listening to our message about why it's so critical to invest in employees that keep the city running. With your input, we saw a movement and an increase at the table that has made it possible to reach a tentative agreement. This is a strong step forward for city employees and we are looking forward to working with you on implementing the classification and compensation study. We're all in agreement. We all want the city to thrive and with all of us working together at will. Thank you on behalf of all of our workers. Thank you. It's been good. Honorable mayor and council members, my name is Sue Powell and I live on Wilkes Circle near Woodrow Avenue. I moved to the circles in 1983 over 35 years ago. I am here in response to the proposed demolition of Errett Circle Church and the construction of townhomes on the property. My neighbors on Wilkes Circle and I wrote a letter about our concerns and we are circulating the letter in the community. We started gathering signatures last week and in three days we gathered over 50 signatures and this is just a start. There is tremendous community opposition to the proposed demolition of the church. Our message is clear. We do not want this community center to be taken away from us and we do not want this site so fundamental to the city's history to be destroyed and built with townhomes. We recognize the importance of creating more housing in Santa Cruz but a housing project that destroys the historic fabric of a community and that does not respect historic cultural and ethnic diversity in a neighborhood is not the solution. The Errett Circle Church is an important and dramatic landmark and the site has been a center for a great diversity of activities for over 125 years. We want this site preserved. From our review of both the California Register of Historical Resources and the National Register of Historic Places we believe that the Errett Circle Church meets the criteria for historic designation and we would like to work with the owners to nominate the church for such preservation. In addition, we would like to work with the new property owners to help create a sustainable church commercial partnership to preserve the building as a community center. Thank you. Thank you. My name is John Sears. I've lived in the circles for 42 years and I went to the community outreach meeting and I've polled my neighbors the consensus of opinion is that the meeting was inadequate given the planning department policy and I don't want to repeat what Sue said but I think it's ironic that the co-housing project may mean the destruction of a neighborhood which functioned in the very way that they're trying to replicate. I've been trying to gather the history from the time the Tabernacle burned down 1935 until the church was built and after and I found a reference that the city actually rented the property from the church and had a playground there and so it's been a continuous neighborhood asset and in a neighborhood that is ahead of the curve in terms of tiny homes and density. So I look forward to working with you on this and to this best resolution and I want to apologize to Joni Mitchell but it doesn't always need to go that you don't know what you've got till it's gone. Let's say a paradise, be thankful for what we got. Thank you. I said to council, my name is Curtis Relaford and I'd like permission to speak and when I ask you that mayor, you say to speak to you, you're facilitating but when your members say a question when I'm doing my speech, it distracts what I really wanted to say. So that last time I was here, I appreciated Ms. Mathis to leave the job to the mayor to facilitate me because that's who I'm giving this respect for. I'm here to speak up for justice and my rights. My rights is valuable too. I came here from Louisiana. I never spoke up for myself. I came to Santa Cruz, California 33 years ago and I came here and learned so much to get me to this particular place in my life to speak up for my rights. I've been promoting peace, love, compassion around here. Community gatherings, people shaking hands, hugging, don't know each other from Adam and I'm bringing that. I'm bringing it loud because ain't nobody downtown talking about love, compassion, empathy for all people. There's not too many people doing that. I'm doing it and I'm having some good resorts. Gang bangers going back to school. People getting out of prison and I'm taking them under the wing and they going back to their families. They getting their kids back. They getting their wife back. These are the resorts I'm getting. Also with an amount of stack of tickets that I'm just working them off. Community service. That's what I'm doing, community service. If I'm not supposed to be here, please tell me if I'm not allowed in Santa Cruz too. I'm not allowed in Louisiana. I'm not allowed in Los Angeles. I'm not allowed anywhere where I go to be me. I'm not trying to be white. I'm not trying to be no other race. I'm being me. Santa Cruz City Council, I would like to speak briefly about what I think is a omission from our cultural memory. In 1877, two men accused of murder were lynched at the Water Street Bridge. This was one of thousands of barely documented lynchings of Mexicans that occurred across the Western United States as a country and as a state and as a city. We are just now coming to terms with our racial history. The Equal Justice Initiative has made great strides in the sense and they've erected plaques and monuments all across the country to commemorate lynchings. Almost none of these memorialize the lynchings of Mexicans. This picture was taken the morning after the lynching. Children are gathered around the tree or the bodies and will later bid on pieces of the ropes. This image isn't but should be iconic in our understanding of our local history. It is crude, it's vulgar and it's unpleasant but so is the history that it represents. To omit it from our recognition would be to sugarcoat our history of racial violence. I believe that a historical marker is an important step towards reconciliation both for Santa Cruz and for the wider west coast of the United States. I would like to or I have submitted to the council alongside a list of educational sources on this topic, a petition that was signed in the space of about two hours by over 150 people. Members of the Santa Cruz community almost all high school students. As a community dedicated to social justice, I think Santa Cruz could be a real leader in this reconciliation. Thank you. Before you begin, I wanna remind folks that if you have signs to please not hold them so they're blocking somebody's vision who's sitting behind you. Thank you very much. Okay, go ahead. Hello everyone, I'm just gonna be quickly reading the petition she was just talking about. We the undersigned request the Santa Cruz City Council move forward erecting a historical marker on Water Street Bridge, memorializing the violent lynching of Jose Chimales and Francisco Arias in 1877. We ask that the marker include both the historic image of the two men's bodies hanging from the tree and a bilingual description of the event and its importance. This event is an important part of Santa Cruz's history and lacking recognition of this downtown lynching is a significant admission. We the undersigned believe that is indicative of a wider reluctance to acknowledge our racial history. The lynching has been researched and written about by local historians, Jeffrey Dunn and Sandy Leiden, but it still lacks wider public recognition. The Equal Justice Initiative, a nonprofit organization in Alabama has worked to put up plaques at southern lynching sites. The organization says despite the lasting legacy of racial terrorism and injustice in this country, there is an astonishing absence of efforts to acknowledge, discuss or address lynching. As a community committed to social justice and equality, we too should be part of this important historical conversation. Thank you. Thank you. Hello council, my name is Elise Kasby and many of you know I'm a local activist. The reason I'm speaking at public comment tonight is that I just want to kind of call attention to a couple things that are happening in our city. I think there has been an old guard that has been in office for quite some time. When I say the old guard, I'm talking about mainstream Democrats who are actually somewhat conservative in especially fiscal ways, who might be better representative they were registered as Republicans but they're not, they're Democrats. So why do I talk about that? The part of the reason is is because I feel like the country and the world in general are in dire need of a paradigm shift that we need to make a quantum leap as people in the world in order to meet the incredible challenges that we have to meet the challenges of climate change and the extinction that's happening right now around the planet to increase democracy. And I think for example, if we just look at that one thing for when I went to a little tourist tour in Sacramento, I found out that the number of representatives there and this was just a few years back was the same as it was 100 years ago. That's ridiculous, our population is. And if I hadn't taken that tour I never would have found that out. So why am I bringing this up? I'm very dismayed that the progressive members in council are being, I feel, hassled a bit over issues that are matters of procedure such as getting things on the agenda. I'm not clear exactly why that happened and I don't wanna point blame. I just wanna ask that, yeah, it's a political position to be on the city council and but still I hope that there are some neutral procedures and I don't want people accusing people of bullying unless that's really happening. Thank you. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Hi, good afternoon. My name is Valerie Corral and I wanna bring to your attention that something quite extraordinary happened today at the Board of Supervisors. This morning there was an ordinance put in place after 12 days to include the equity grant which is primarily meaning, and I think that you may already know about this $10 million that is offered from the BCC and we were given 30 days every city in the state of California was given 30 days to have in place an ordinance. Well, it's an amazing opportunity for this city council to do the same thing and to adopt the measures that the Board of Supervisors adopted. It's possible. The language is already written. Alan Hopper, who is an advisor and attorney has been in the past and attorney to WAM offered some language and I'll get that language to you and he also offered to help craft that if necessary. But for more than two and a half decades in this community we have partnered with Santa Cruz, WAM has partnered with Santa Cruz City and County and we've been at the forefront of access to medical marijuana and it was a socially conscious and action that led us to this and we persisted in a vacuum. So the laws that define compassionate access at that time and that have come about over these last two and a half decades need adjustment, they need improvement, especially in light of the new regulations from Prop 64. Equity, it's an equity loan and equity refers to disproportionately affected communities, people of color, women, cannabis drug offenders, people of low income, those who lack access to revenue as a woman who's been arrested three times and works for cannabis and who works with financially disenfranchised community members have experienced some hard schooling. We have no lobbyists in Sacramento, we have no money to write laws and I'm here to lobby you. So please do this, I'll help you do it, I'll email you what you need to do and you can do it. Thank you. We'll have both. Thank you. Members of the community and city council, why are we not in the civic auditorium? Why are people standing outside? This has repeatedly been requested. Yes, I blame the mayor. He could have scheduled it. But I blame the four progressives on this council who could have insisted on it. Why aren't they doing it? Why are speakers, and I appreciate value for how it's not been cut off as every other speaker I have seen throughout the afternoon be cut off, why are they not resisting these cut-offs that the mayor is engaged in? Have a rent control proposal that not only gets presented but gets passed as it would have been passed because they're afraid of being recalled. No, that's not what we expect from people who we vote for. Fine limits, two minutes per speaker. People cannot get their speeches in within two minutes. These four, it is their responsibility to address this issue. Both sessions, having things on the agenda. Any attorney today presented suddenly new information about a closed item. I requested this item be put ahead two weeks. We didn't know about it. No member of the four person progressive except for Mr. Cron objected and then no one removed to put it ahead two weeks. Open agenda formation sessions where you the public can be present at the formation of agendas. So you can be a part of it, and not simply be here a passive audience waiting for them to fulfill the staff's agenda which we know is hopefully not the agenda of the council majority, at least on issues that are coming up later tonight. Thank you. Good afternoon, or good evening city council. I understand there's this whole topic of divisiveness or everything going on. I mean, it made the front page of the good time so it must be big. While this is happening though, there is something that we can agree on and this agreement is in regards to improving transit. How can the city of Santa Cruz show its street smarts if the streets themselves are not even safe? Laurel and Felix is considered a school crossing yet Laurel Street itself is treated like a highway. It's dim at night, every time it rains, people can barely see other people. It's unsafe to cross that street just to even get off the bus stop. I've been hit nearly countless times and I get this little nice pocket flashlight here and you know, it doesn't do justice and like it's ridiculous and we do have housing as an issue but transportation and housing do tie together hand in hand more than you think and all I ask here today is that there needs to be a focus on advocacy for safer streets and better marketing for our current public transportation services. Street smarts meet Metro smarts. Thank you. Are there any other members of the community who'd like to address the council on items that are not on tonight's agenda or on today's agenda? I'm Abby. I'm here to speak about something that is not really on your agenda, although kind of it's gonna be mainly about rent control, that's caused eviction. I agree with Robert. We should have this over at the not city hall at the Civic. So I wrote a couple people in Seattle and Portland in regards to their situation there as far as homelessness and I wanna read what one of them wrote. And I was surprised at their response. This is from Nick Jones, who's a legislative assistant with Seattle's council member Sawant. What he said in Seattle, we are constantly hearing about how the main issue is drug abuse, mental health, or people from outside the city flocking here because of our quote unquote free services. These all scapegoat the issue because at the core of the problem is relying on the for-profit housing market to provide affordable housing for people. To many of the powers that have influence in city hall like big developers and the landlord lobby, this assessment is unacceptable. In Santa Cruz, cause I wrote him about Santa Cruz saying what was said in the report last time we were here. And so he responded. In Santa Cruz it could be helpful to look at to what percentage of residents are currently rent burden spending more than 30% of income on rent and what the average cost of apartments in the area costs. And he also says all serious studies about the root cause of homelessness point to unbelievable dearth of truly affordable housing. It's clear the main thing pushing people into homelessness is housing prices and evictions. So please, we need just cause eviction. I could at least finish my sentence. Thank you. Thank you. All right. I think you'll be our last speaker. Before you begin, I just wanna ensure that there's nobody else who's here to speak on oral communications items that are not on today's agenda. Are you here? How would I just think about it? I don't think there's someone else in the back. Okay. So if you could please line to my left and then. She's heading there. Same old. No, no, I'm sorry. Of course not, not you. If those that are in the audience that are interested in speaking on oral communications items that are not. That was a line. I'm sorry. Yeah, no, I wasn't clear as well. So thank you very much. Okay. Please begin. Good evening. I'm Scott Graham. I'd like to speak tonight about things that have happened in the past that have closed off this government. At one time, there used to be green cards over here and any member of the public has filled one out and take an item off the consent agenda to talk about it. Now we have to go to a council member and beg them to take something off. I'd like to see that restored. Another thing is the minutes of the council meetings back when Emma was the city clerk, not only said who spoke at the meetings, but a brief synapses of what they said, what their issue was. And now it's just a list of people that spoke. Has nothing, you have no idea what they said. You'd have to go and watch the video. The other thing is this agenda meeting, why is it secret? Why is it closed off? In Berkeley, it's a public event. The public is allowed to come to those meetings and they actually put their two cents in. So I'd like to see more openness in this government so that the public gets more access to what's going on and gets more input into what's going on. Thank you. Hi, my name is Sherry Sherry Peterson. I want to speak about the bus service. I was walking down, it was my borrowed walker, the second walker I've broken, and walking down mission and there's only a bus every two hours down mission. So to get to your doctor appointment, you either have to walk along mission like this far from the semis and cars going 50 and it's really terrifying. I was praying the whole time, you know, going to my doctor, but I just wish that mission needs to have three buses an hour and I wish he could restore that. I wish every bus stop would have like a solar light on it. So females that are stuck at the bus stop when it's dark could like have a light. If some lunatic is sitting next to you, you don't want to sit there and be afraid. I don't like being out at night myself. I only come out to talk to you to try and get your attention about homelessness, basically, but this bus is a problem. And I think if they had an overnight bus that ran all night and a lot of drivers agree with me, if there was a 71, if there was a 35, then people could at least spend the night on the bus. I have a friend that's 86 and she has to ride the Dearborn over by Gilroy three times a week because she can't afford to stay in a motel every night, but she's under wits and two, we're all in our wits end and we're looking for solutions. And I'm asking you, I'm begging you to deepen your heart and look for solutions. Thank you. And before you begin, I believe you'll be our last member of the community who's interested in speaking to us on items not on today's agenda. Okay, go right ahead. Thank you for allowing me to speak. My name is Steve Rohr. I think I might be a little bit of a minority as far as my opinion here. I want to ensure that as voters and citizens of Santa Cruz that we're all represented and that no one should feel intimidated and I do feel intimidated because I heard people speaking, I disagreed with them. By the way, I think in America we're allowed to disagree, right? Is that okay? By the way, when you disagree, it doesn't mean you hate anyone. But I heard a gentleman talking about rent control. Well, we, overwhelmingly as citizens of this city voted down rent control and yet we still got rent control. I want to tell you my story. I do have some property in Santa Cruz. The way I got that was to drive an hour. Every day, get up at four in the morning and drive for an hour, work in construction which I'm still doing. I've been doing it for 42 years. That's how I was able to afford my first house. Nobody gave it to me. I wasn't born with a golden spoon in my mouth. I have health issues due to construction. My body's wearing out. I still work in construction. And yes, we do have some rental properties. We rent the rooms to students in one property for a fraction of what the university charges for a room. And yet people are telling us that we're supposed to drop our rent or we can't even increase it with the cost of inflation. So I want to represent people that have worked their tail off their whole life. And now we've got people that were not willing to sacrifice many of them. I don't know, any renters, I have two rental properties in the house I live in. One of the renters sacrifices to drive an hour each way to afford to live here. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Thanks for your speech. Okay. So that will conclude oral communications. So at this time we have one item on our agenda tonight. Before we go ahead and jump into the item, I would like to just remind folks of our council norms and my role as mayor and presiding officer of the meeting. So the council adopted some norms and I'll just briefly review those to be respectful, to engage in open and honest communication, to be truthful and honest, to address difficult issues, to seek to find areas of common ground, be open to different perspectives, to give the benefit of the doubt, roll out model good leadership and be considerate of each other's time. Everybody who is here has an opportunity to, or will have an opportunity to address the council. I ask that you allow that person to speak to the council when they are given the opportunity without interruption as they will allow for you to do the same. It's my job to maintain decorum in our council chambers. If I observe an individual disrupting the council meeting, I will ask that you please stop and give you a warning. If it is repeated, then I will ask that you please leave the council chambers so that we can move forward with our discussion and our processes. So I appreciate and thank you in advance for adhering to our rules of decorum and hopefully allow for us to have a thoughtful policy a discussion and experience this evening. And then I'll just go ahead and at this point, turn it over to our city staff who will be presenting the item. Thank you, Mayor Watkins, council members, members of the community, good evening. I'm Tina Scholl, the assistant city manager and to my left is Susie O'Hara, the assistant to the city manager. And we are heading up the presentation team for you tonight. Similar to your meeting two weeks ago, we have quite a lineup of additional speakers as well. We have fire chief, Jason Hayduk, we have planning and community development director, Steve Butler, economic development director, Bonnie Lipscomb. We have our city attorney, Tony Condati, and we also have some special guests. Dr. Leff is here from the county, our county health officer, as well as Mr. Brent Adams. We'll be speaking to tonight. We also have our parks and recreation director, Tony Elliott, for questions. So we have another full night of presentation for you. A lot of speakers. Okay, so similar to last time, we have a discussion agenda for you so you can track on how the evening will go. We'll first review the motions from your last council meeting, which largely drove the content for tonight's meeting. You'll hear an update on the city county joint action plan operations. There will be staff analysis and response to the motion from the last city council meeting. And then finally we'll summarize with some staff recommendations and considerations for council direction. So then first looking to your last council meeting two weeks ago, we received a set of direction from the city council that we have here. And just so you could track, you can understand the coding on the side. You'll see motion carried to and either check marks or diamonds. The diamonds are substantive items that are being brought forth tonight for your consideration and discussion with work product associated with them. The first being returning with a list of possible city-owned locations for encampments and safe parking locations. The second one is returning with ordinance language for both transitional encampment permitting and safe parking programs. The next one down is talking about the motion carried to direct staff to provide additional information on how this motion's incorporated into the project charter around encampments. You might recall at your last meeting we presented two project charters, one around hours in public facilities and council gave direction to work on that so that works ongoing. And then we also presented one on transitional encampments. At the time of the meeting, council didn't accept that work plan but we're curious to know how another set of action would fit in with that project charter as outlined by staff. And then the final action item, that's the diamond below is directing us to return with a revised shelter crisis declaration. We have that for you. And so then you'll see items that are check marks and those are items that have been completed or are substantially underway. The first one is directing city staff to share information with the county and that has been done. There was a two by two meeting that occurred since your last meeting, your meeting tonight and there was a robust discussion there and all of this was conveyed. The second check mark is removing the closure date at the gateway camp. That was your direction and that's been done. The third is providing signage at the camp about alternatives and that has been done. The fourth check mark directing staff to communicate with county partners that we are committed to the closure. Again, that was done largely communicated in the two by two meeting as well as staff to staff interactions between the city and the county. And then finally, the council did direct work on the project charter process for public facilities analysis and that work will be ongoing. That's not immediate work to return. But we'd just like to summarize for you so you can see how your action tonight is responsive to the council direction of the last meeting as well as the things that have been accomplished. So with that, we will turn to our first segment of the agenda and I will ask Susie O'Hara to provide an update on the joint action plan. Thank you, Tina and good evening. And I'm sure going into the night we'll recheck in on the timing. So I'm gonna be starting the conversation around an update of the joint action plan and then also kind of finishing the conversation trying to wrap up. There's gonna be a lot of information coming at you this evening, a lot of different speakers really trying to distill really a huge amount of information into what would be appropriate next steps. So with regard to the joint action plan I wanted to talk about two kind of specific areas. Current conditions at the camp as well as our engagement with the camp residents and really trying to understand kind of fundamentally who is out there? What are their needs and how best to serve folks that are out there? So with regard to conditions Fire Chief Hayduk will be talking more about this but I have been out there every week multiple times a week, really getting into the camp, having conversations with folks in terms of outreach and engagement and understanding what opportunities they may have for shelter provision but also having a lot of firsthand contact with the conditions at the camp. I just want to reiterate that it is significantly challenging out there in terms of health and safety considerations. The Fire Chief will talk about that more but I also wanted to reflect on that. So just to orient you to the left side of the screen here we've had 80 contacts with residents, 25 shuttle vouchers distributed and 12 residents that have taken us up on the offer of transporting folks to the winter shelter programs at either the VFW or Laurel Street. Last week, Megan Bunchenai also met with the camp council so there really is a self-governed group of folks that are in living at the camp. I see a few folks actually outside and I know that they had planned on coming and speaking as well. We conducted a meeting with five individuals last week, last Friday, to really understand what brought them to the camp, what their hopes are for maintaining the camp and the conditions there and then what services and what kind of shelter models might make sense for folks. And then also their interest in collaborating with the city and the county to really develop a stronger sense of partnership and coordination with our jurisdictions. So that was really an important information for us to take in and we will be meeting with them again on this Friday. So with regard to shelter provision, this was also mentioned at last meeting but to reiterate the Laurel Street program opened on the 13th of February. There are 40 beds at that site. They are not all full so we are really focused on getting more people into that shelter. 1220 River Street, we are moving forward with a contract with the Salvation Army to provide 60 individual tent sites at 1220 River Street and that will be, we are intending to open that on April 17th with board direction on the 16th of April so that contract will be with the county board of supervisors. The armory and the use of that facility is still being vetted by the county. We did report on that last meeting and those discussions are ongoing. In addition to that, as we really try to grapple with we have this state funding that's come to our region, the LOI process for emergency shelter provision, that process is complete. There are several programs that are funded for that and that was really to try to bolster our emergency shelter programming. So the AFC Safe Parking Program is part of that portfolio, 1220 River Street, the extension of the North and South County winter shelter programs to June 30th as well as support for the Polly Loft and their ongoing operations. So that process is finished and in addition to that the Heap and Cash RFP award announcements are expected very soon as early as next week and with those two processes done we'll really have a much better understanding as to the capacity that our local nonprofits have to meet these expectations, quite frankly these really high expectations we have to enhance our sheltering and homeless programming capacity. So we'll be able to report more out on that as well in the coming weeks. With regard to the encampment and neighborhood management a lot of this stuff we talked about to reiterate we have commenced the 24-7 Gateway Encampment Security. We are in ongoing conversations with Gateway neighbors, Gateway Encampment neighbors to ensure that that security is the most effective as it can be and we will be working with them moving forward. We have moved the footprint, the tent footprint of the encampment back. I did want to comment that the footprint yes is impacted by where the tent sites is, are. I think the footprint is more impacted by the day use quite frankly. We have a lot of people hanging around on the levee that it kind of pushes the activities out onto the levee pathway and so it's not just necessarily the tents that are impactful. The downtown streets team is cleaning Falker Street five to seven days a week. The mobile command unit has been placed in the Ross parking lot and that is intermittent and the syringe kiosk has been installed and it's quite heavily used. I think it was at capacity and needed to be somewhat on an emergency basis needed the syringes to be removed last week on the eighth. So with that bit of context I'm gonna turn it over to the fire chief to give you a little bit more information about the current conditions. Mayor, council, Jason Heide, fire chief for the city of Santa Cruz and I'm gonna talk a little bit about this. If you have questions, please let me know. One of the main directives that came out at the last council meeting was maximizing coordination efforts between the city and the county. And we've been having ongoing meetings within the city planning our efforts down at the camp as well as meeting with the county outside of the two by two meetings to discuss what we are doing to support the camp to mitigate any hazards that we find there. And finally what we came up with is a web EOC and what that is is an electronic platform that allows us to put our actions onto a web-based program so that we can both see it. So the county can see it, the city can see it, fire department, parks and rec, health services so that we can see when HP HP was there. We can see when the last time services were delivered significant incidents occurred down there. So it's a common platform that we can coordinate our efforts but more importantly, we can be aware of what the other agencies are doing. So I think that one accomplishment really hits home to what you asked of us as far as coordinating efforts and maximizing those. It provides situational awareness and real-time information. One portion of it that will be up and running soon is the shelter portion. And what that is is it has a list of shelters and more importantly what their current availability is and what their capacity is and what the different nuances is will they allow pets, will they allow couples? So that is something that someone in the field on a mobile device can look at and say we have shelter available for you right now. Do you want it? And so we'll be able to track that. And I think that's very important because the information flow has been challenging between all the non-governmental agencies, the faith-based agencies, the county and the city. This is a platform where we can put all that information in and we can access it in real time. Ongoing maintenance of the camp facilities as far as refuse the restrooms and sharps disposals, that's been a coordinated effort. Parks and Rec has taken the brunt of doing that. They've done a really good job. We need to do a better job as far as the amount of debris and some of the garbage that we have there because of the impacts to the community as far as health hazards. And I'll hit on that when I talk about the County Health Officer Assessment. Next this week we wanna do a site survey for the layout of the tents themselves for life safety and mainly for access. We've had a number of incidents. I talked about access for medical calls in that area. We also had a fire and we've had a few other incidents where access into that area is very challenging. And then the general layout doesn't allow for any safe spacing between the tents. And so we're going to engage with the council that's there and come up with what we think would be a better solution to how people are arranged down there for their own safety. In addition to that, we will be doing increased clean out. There's a lot of stuff there that's not necessarily just for living. It's not just for people who are sleeping in a tent. There's a lot of other stuff there and we wanna get that out. Calls for service continue. I know that we've had a decrease in the amount of law calls and medical calls in the last few weeks. And I don't have a reason for that but it is a continual source for fire law and medical. And the last, the County Health Officer, Dr. Leff, who's here, in our discussions with the county, we were concerned not only just with my concerns about fire and medical and law enforcement but we're also concerned about county public safety health. And that was, that's one of the reasons why we have a sharps disposal chaos down there to limit the spread of the disease. They did an assessment of the camp and despite our best intentions of raising up the tents off of the ground with pallets that created habitat for rats. And they are a vector for disease within a population that's living in close quarters. And despite our best efforts to provide restroom facilities and hand washing stations, it still has huge potential, not only for the occupants of the camp but spreading beyond the camp as far as a public safety hazard for disease spread. The County Health Officer, is he gonna speak tonight? Okay, I'll let him speak to that but that is a real concern not only for the inhabitants of the camp and the potential impact to them but the impact to the community that they're in because of the concentration of people and either overwhelming the sanitation that we've supplied or not using it correctly. So I'll let Dr. Leff speak more to that unless you have any other questions. Yep. Thank you. I'm Arnold Leff. I'm the County Health Officer. I also function as the city's health officer. And you all received the letter that I wrote a few days ago outlining a number of recommendations. Most of the recommendations are in process, the three major ones being to decrease the density of that camp as soon as it can be done since the significant density really is a public health danger. The road and control issue has just been spoken to and I know that your parks director, Mr. Elliott and our County's vector control are working together to find someone who can start to decrease the road and population at the camp. And then the other issue which is dear to my heart is the issue of syringes. We have a large percentage of the people at the camp are injecting drug users and require from 300 to 600 syringes a day. And as a result, one of my recommendations is to allow us to provide those syringes. Currently, we have some individuals who get syringes at our facilities and bring them down to the camp. I would hope that the council would continue to support that and actually encourage those syringes to be available. That's a huge potential public health issue. As you know, approximately a year and a half ago, we had a very serious hepatitis A outbreak. Now we've immunized thousands of people against hepatitis A and I'm hoping that some of the people at the camp have been immunized. We are also bringing our medical staff to the encampment to vaccinate folks for influenza and hepatitis A when they're interested in doing that. So I'm here mainly to let you know that we are concerned, obviously, the camp at some point needs to be closed in the interim. Any decrease in density would be helpful and the need to deal with the rodent problem and the syringe problem you're in process of doing. And we are in process of doing as well. So I am open to any questions you might have. Okay, Council Member Glover and then Council Member Crum. Thank you, Dr. Leff. Just wanted to clarify just so that there's a clear understanding within the community. You had estimated 300 or 600 syringes per day. That's for the entire camp. And that's an estimate. We are presuming that and based on a survey that our homeless persons health project did, we're assuming about 50% of that camp is doing injecting, is injecting drugs. We've distributed a huge amount of nalaxone, which is Narcan, which is an overdose prevention substance, but we're still concerned because if people are reusing syringes or using friends syringes, two major catastrophes happen, maybe three. One is you can spread hepatitis A, which when you spread hepatitis A, approximately 20% of it winds up in a community outside that nexus group. The second thing that happens is that you get wound infections. And those wound infections can be very, very serious because they can eventually go to the heart and cause what we call endocarditis or an infection of the heart. And Dominican is seeing, unfortunately, a recurrence or a resurgence, I should say, of valvular heart disease, secondary to injection drugs. And the third major catastrophe, which is related to that, is that it costs tens of millions of dollars. To deal with what dirty syringes bring to people that do not have clean syringes. Just the Amaline Clinic, the 282 patients at the Amaline Clinic cost the California, cost our alliance, our MediCal program, $52 million in 2018, 282 patients. And the top 10, we're half of that. So the reality is we need to deal with the syringe program. We need medically assisted treatment, which the county is doing our best to bump up and get to people so they can get medically assisted treatment on demand when they need it. But in the interim for the encampment, rodent control, decreased density, and allow for as many syringes that are needed. Thank you, there's one more question. In your professional experience and opinion, what is the most cost effective and proven way to help people transition off of intravenous drug use? Well, I think there's no one way. I think there's a number of way. Medically assisted treatment with Suboxone, methadone treatment, which is a longer term rehab, and then there's residential treatment for those that it's appropriate for. So, and there's a number of other things, but we can do it. Resources, we're hoping are gonna come in. Some resources are beginning to come, resources are beginning to come in to deal with that population group, but they're a very, very vulnerable population, not only with substance use, but also mental illness. Thank you, Dr. Leff. Questions, I think, was there a question here? And then- Yes, my question, thank you. You already asked. Oh yes, okay, Councilor McBrown. Sorry. Hi, Dr. Leff, thank you for being here. I used to sit up here with you years ago. Yeah, I remember. I was just wondering if you can tell us off the top of your head, how many bed spaces there are available for residential treatment in Santa Cruz County? If not, we can get it, but I just wanna get at the, related to the potential need and interest, do we have sufficient bed spaces in your assessment? Because a lot of people tell us, well, we just need treatment, not all of this other stuff, and it's a little harder, it's a little trickier than that. It's more complicated and resource intensive. So- Yeah, I don't know that I know the beds today. I do know that we, the county, have participated in a state and federal program to get MediCal to pay for residential drug treatment. And that program has just begun, really. It's sort of beginning to get going. Once that happens, you're going to see Janice is projecting to double the number of residential beds that they have for substance use treatment. But I could tell you we're going to need a significant amount more. Any other questions? Thank you for being here tonight, Dr. You're very welcome. Yeah. Thank you so much, Dr. Love. Okay, so with that, we're now going to shift on to the next aspect of the presentation. Of course, we can come back for questions. So this is a brief presentation on the first deliverable that we returned back to the city council. And this was a revised shelter crisis declaration. And this was in your packet in total. So this is already, it was published on Thursday with the rest of the agenda report. So just as a reminder for the council and members of the audience who maybe didn't watch the last discussion, but under the California government code, local governments can declare shelter crises or a shelter crisis. If it finds that you can see this in red font, a significant number of persons are without the ability to obtain shelter resulting in a threat to their life and safety. And by declaring this, that local government sets in effect a few very helpful mechanisms. The first is it provides immunity from liability for ordinary negligence. So knowing that you have to move with due haste to try to resolve the issue, it does provide some protection. If not, everything goes perfectly according to plan. Of course, this does not protect against malfeasance or gross negligence, things like that. But it provides us a sense that we're trying to do our best under probably not optimal circumstances. The second and more significantly is that it allows suspension of state, local statutes, regulations or ordinances, prescribing standards of housing, health or safety when those existing standards would provide an impediment or some sort of barrier to whatever emergency sheltering plan you're trying to put forward. It also allows the local governing body to put forth alternate health and safety codes. So this is the value in doing this. We did some analysis of this last year the council has an adopted shelter crisis declaration on the books that was adopted by resolution in January of 2018. And in the discussion we had with you with your last meeting, there was talks that although it's in place and it has been helpful, in fact, that allowed us to access some of that $10 million in state funding, we felt it could be strengthened. We felt that in two prominent ways it could be a better instrument. And you can see those in the blue box on the right of the slide. First is that contrary to the existing shelter crisis declaration, the one before you tonight doesn't have any reference to any specific proposal or plan or navigation center or any sort of model. It just talks about it uses a language actually drawn from the government code about temporary bridge shelter, which could have a broad array of uses. So we feel like this is as much more flexibility and broader flexibility for whatever steps the city might find itself taking. And secondarily, the shelter crisis declaration, the revised one provides much more precise references to code and statutes that we're missing. And so rather than having any ambiguity, it just made sense just to strengthen that. So you've seen the document in your packet and we could discuss it further, but those were the two, it's an entirely different document, but those are the two major changes that were made that are before you this evening. And I can take questions now or we can take them as we move on. Okay, seeing none, okay. All right, so then now if I could invite up, I guess I'll introduce her first. Sabani Lipscomb is our director of economic development and she's taking on a fairly hefty portion of the presentation tonight. So the second substantive action that council directed was for staff to bring back a list of city-owned properties that could serve as a transitional encampment or safe parking program location. And so Bonnie went through a very substantive analysis. In your packet that was published on Thursday, there's a series of maps and we have access to those if you wish to see those. Bonnie has a slightly different take in her analysis. So she's gonna walk the city council through a series of slides through that analysis. Thanks Bonnie. Thank you right now. Good afternoon, mayor and members of council. So the map you see before you is very similar to the one that you have in the packet. We have a few refinements. I won't go into some of the details of those. They're basically from our assessor's parcel map and looking and refining some of the city ownership. Just some of those when parcels change, it takes a while before they're updated. And so this map is actually accurate for city ownership. And just to orient you to the overview in the upper left-hand corner, you have the property that we own outside the city. And that includes mostly property that is for watershed purposes. You also have the Loch Lomond Recreation Area up in this upper left-hand corner of your screen. And then some watershed areas and then we also have our Sky Park property. And just wanted to mention most of those other than in that area north of the city, we also own some property in Live Oak, again for water-related purposes. And then the majority of our remaining property is within the city limits. And that includes a couple of annex properties, one for water use and one for Dimeo Lane. So overall, we have 550 parcels in the broader Santa Cruz area when we actually start narrowing down the filter based on some initial feedback we had from Council. We have 287 parcels that are actually 5,000 square feet or above. And we did feel like that was a significant number. Just looking at, as we're looking at transitional encampment potential sites and for safe parking, looking specifically at sort of a minimum square foot size. So these sites would be sites that could accommodate potentially up to 50 people per site. And so this was some of the initial feedback we had from Council. And so this is the map that you see before you. If we expand that to, or increase that size to 10,000 square feet, which is slightly smaller than the 1220 River site where we previously had the shelter that site was, the usable area was around 12,500. I think the actual total parcel size was about 1,700 square feet, but some of that was sloped. And that's an important consideration because when you look at a lot of our property, many of the parcels, particularly when you get outside our core area in Santa Cruz have slopes or have other elements to them that make them not usable. So again, just looking at the overall map, what you see before you, the green area are our parks and open spaces, the purple area are our water facilities, the blue are our parking lots and sort of that golden orange are all of our other miscellaneous city properties. And I should say before I go further, I do wanna just thank and appreciate actually Rich Westfall in the city ITs department for creating all the base maps. And then for David McCormick, who is our asset property manager, who spent quite a bit of time really looking at the details and checking accuracy as far as parcel data to make sure that we have the correct information and help put this presentation together. So I just wanted to acknowledge them. Okay, so going in a little more closely now, just looking at the parcels within the city limits. And one of the reasons why we did that is we also largely control the permitting and the use within the city limits. And then also major reasons of just access being transportation and for a few other reasons which we'll go into in a little more detail. So looking within the main city boundaries, we have 323 parcels. We have roughly 215 parcels that are 5,000 square feet or larger. The only difference on this map is just drawing your attention to the upper part of the screen where you see the red dotted circle. That's actually a water-owned property on Ocean Street extension. And I have it circled and we looked at this one a little more closely. It's a fairly large site as it turns out quite a bit of it sloped. It is, what we thought had some real potential initially is we could look a little more closely because of the slope of the site. We think it may not be a site that we could consider for long-term, but it is worth a little more analysis. It is close similar to the 1220 River Street of the Concernist near a major water supply intake, so there is some concern for that. We would have to require carefully controlled conditions relative to sanitation, runoff, et cetera, and as I mentioned, the slope. So while we initially thought the site had some great potential, as we looked more closely at it, we realized that it didn't. So most of the other sites are, and we go to the next slide, I believe. Yeah, so we also removed and realized as we were looking at these sites, and where you see the exes are actually sites where we have critical facilities, and so those are water facilities, treatment plants, other areas that are very sensitive to use. Many of them already are gated in some way to restrict public access to them, and as we looked more closely, we actually went through all of them and looked more closely at them, and that's where we eliminated most of the water property sites. There are a couple remaining, and we'll show you those shortly, and that's why I went over the one that we didn't eliminate initially, but it did have some concerns over it. And then to just go a little deeper on that, as you can see, we have these sites. Some are, as I mentioned, are gated because they're sensitive to water and tank. We have pumps, tanks, storage facilities on site, and obviously our water treatment plant, which is very sensitive. So we have some health and safety concerns from providing access to these sites, some concerns about potential damage to property, just operational impacts. We restrict public access to these areas for a reason, and then also a lot of these areas, they're used. They're fully, as you can see, on the treatment plant area, there's just not room to have compatible use with those. And then we also, as just sort of the initial lens, also looked at many of the properties we own, and those are many of the properties that were in sort of that golden rod, that golden yellow area, are properties that have existing uses on them. So from our Loud and Nelson Civic facilities to some of our existing shelters, properties that we lease to other entities, to our wharf, which has active uses on it. So overall, some of the disqualifying concerns, we didn't eliminate parks from this initially, but we did look at compatible uses. We looked at leases that we have with private entities to run some of our public facilities. We looked at operational impacts, available space after the overall use were being used, again, existing lease terms, and some of the other impacts, both community and economic as well. And then finally, we also looked at the physical constraints. Many of these parcels, as you can see, have physical challenges to being able to use them, whether they're overall health and safety concerns. The terrain, as you can see in the bottom one, is just too sloped without actually doing serious grading. And some just because of access, you just can't get them to be able to do any of this site work. Security and access being able to get access both for services, for social services, and also just for access to for security and our police and fire to be able to get in if there are a fire does restrict some of these sites. And then of course, in our city, we do have many of these sites that are prone to flooding, particularly when you look around the river corridor. So for example, with the tannery project, when we built that, we actually built it intentionally so that you had a garage on the ground floor and all the housing was after the first floor and we have had to evacuate that site in times of flooding. So we looked at that lens as well. So just to orient you where we are really looking for, we think the sites that have the most suitability or is in the area that you see outlined by that center blue square. And so we really focus on this area after taking a broad look at all of the property we own, both inside and outside the city, we realize that almost all of the sites that really have the parameters that we think we need to be able to have a transitional encampment and also a safe parking program are going to be in our larger sort of core area. And those reasons and the benefit of really locating in these core locations is accessibility, access to transit. And I'll show you a close up of our transit map closely. In a second, utility, access to utilities, refuse service against security and police services, nearby social services, habitat impacts. And I'll go into that in just another minute. And just also keeping our individuals and part of our community as part of our community rather than putting them outside our city limits. This one, just to show you, this is that same area from the previous side that's in the blue box, but it is overlaid with a GIS layer that shows all of our topography. And you see those in the brown sort of topo lines, as well as some of our sensitive habitat area. And then in the blue cross section on the bottom is also our coastal zone. So we also looked at it from where do these fall in some of these sensitive habitat areas and different areas and sloping terrain from the topo that we really need to be concerned about whether or not we can actually site anything there. So again, those most viable public properties within this sort of concentrated sort of core area are accessible, have access to public transit. We can bring in potable water, electricity, have minimal environmental impacts or sensitive habitat and are compatible also with surrounding, the surrounding environment and the land use. So this map that I'm not gonna repeat the sort of the points on the right, they're the same, but I did want to show as we take off the topo layers you can actually see in the, and I'm not sure if you can see it from this distance, but the brown areas are actually public metro transit sops, which the majority of those are really in the core of the city. And so one of the things that we really wanted to look at is make sure that we had within a half mile for most of these stops access to public transit. So finally, just getting to the city owned property within this core area, we did identify an initial six sites. And I will say that no site is ideal. There's physical constraints, environmental concerns, coastal concerns and almost every site there are some concerns. There are some benefits to the site and if you would like to go into those later, we're happy to go into some of those as well as the approximate size of each of those sites, but I'll name them just quickly. We do have one, I can actually go to the next slide. Yeah, thanks. One site, which is a water property site to, and again I wanna say this is an initial pass, looking at these sites. We need to get direction from you of what we've presented tonight of the parameters, if those make sense to you, if some of them don't make sense to you, if there's different things you want us to look at, we really would like that feedback. But specifically the sites from our first pass that we've looked at that we think are appropriate to do a deeper dive and go into more closely the suitability for these sites include one water property that's off of High Street, that's actually between the two churches off High, and this was a former reservoir site, the tanks have been removed. It could potentially be a good safe parking site, it's a site that's about 12,000 square feet, the usable area is about 8,000 square feet, it's worth a deeper look at that site. We have a site that's the Wharf Corp yard that is in the lower part of your screen, it's roughly two acres. Some challenges on this site is that we have just the title is clouded, we need to look at that and make sure we actually have site control with that site. We have a parking lot, we have two parking lots, one is located fairly close to the police station back behind Washington Street, it's north of Depot Park. Obviously there's some challenges with being anywhere near the park with that sort of concentrated use that we would need to look further at, but that is one site that again has about 8,700 square feet to look at. And then we have parking lot, and that's called parking lot 24 for those of you who are looking more closely at our parking map. And then we have parking lot 17, which is adjacent to the river, that is a linear site, it's actually about 12,000 square feet, it has some potential, that again has some challenges, it is located adjacent to the Kaiser Arena. So there's some compatibility uses, we also have a use agreement for handicapped spaces during game events, so we need to look at the time usage of that. And then finally the last two sites are park sites to look at more closely. In the past, looking at circling there up there is the San Lorenzo Park and there would be some analysis on I think the upper Benchlands area that Susie might want to go into more detail on that. And then the final site to look at is the site off of East Cliff, a portion of the lower side of Jesse Street Marsh. So those are the initial six sites, again none of them, all of them have constraints. They are the sites that the city owns that we think from the initial pass are most suitable, but that doesn't mean that we believe we should go forward with any of these sites at this time, but we are looking for some more feedback from you on those. Thank you. All right, thank you very much Bonnie. And so next for the next portion, and this is also the third deliverable for council tonight, I'm going to invite the Planning and Community Development Director Lee Butler to return to talk about the transitional encampment and safe parking ordinances to walk through some of the basics of how they might work and operate. Thank you Tina and good evening mayor and council members. So this, as Tina mentioned at the beginning is responsive to the council direction from the 26th of last month. And the ordinance is modeled, the draft ordinance that's before you is modeled primarily from an ordinance that was developed in Seattle that went through several versions to get to the place where it is currently in effect there in Seattle. And what this ordinance would do is it would facilitate the establishment of transitional encampments and safe parking areas. And those are really safe places for people experiencing homelessness to sleep, to store their belongings and to access for them to access facilities and services. It could take the form of individual tents. It could be cars or RVs. It could be larger group tents, for example, the sprung structures with the hard sides. It could be some variation through the emergency shelter crisis, the council could subsequently adopt different building health and safety standards. And so there could be alternatives that include things like sheds that can or tiny homes that can accommodate individuals. And so really the definition is somewhat flexible because what there is a demand for is to be determined. And so the ordinance could allow for any one of those or a combination of those on specific sites. And it's broken up into two separate and distinct portions. The first is long-term uses and those are associated with religious organizations. And the second is temporary uses on certain properties. And so I'll talk a little bit about each of those here. So the first is long-term uses associated with religious organizations. This is properties that are owned or controlled by a religious organization or if a religious organization is operating and it's the primary use on a property then regardless of the zoning district then a transitional encampment or safe parking place could be allowed on that site without any permits. It would be allowed by right. There are some approvals that would be required and I'll get to those in just a minute. And so I'll go through some of the specifications that the ordinance identifies. First is that parking on the site for the example for the religious use could be displaced. And the use itself, the encampment would not require any parking. We have in the draft ordinance a maximum of 50 occupants at any one location. And there are various fire safety, health and sanitation standards that would need to be met on the site. The provision of water the provision of restroom facilities and so forth. Cooking facilities would not be required. They may or may not be provided and there's some specifications if they are provided. Unaccompanied minors, those under 18 would not be allowed on the site unless they have a parent or guardian there. And then when I spoke to the approvals that are necessary there would be a required approval of an operations plan. So how that use is going to deal with potential complaints that they get from the surrounding community, how they're going to manage their restroom facilities, how they're going to refer people to services, what they're going to do if someone under 18 comes to the camp and requests to take up residence there. So a whole set of standard operating procedures. And then there is a provision that would allow for termination of the use by the city manager which would be appealed to the city council which is appealable to the city council I should say. And those criteria are included in the religious organization section. Moving on to the temporary uses on public or private properties. The distinction between the primary distinction between these are the first one that I'll call out is those affiliated with religious institutions that is a long-term use as it is structured in this draft ordinance. These temporary uses are just that temporary. They would be allowed for up to one year initially and they would have an extension for an additional year. And I should add that the ordinances, this is just kind of a summary of them. The ordinances contain additional information both the religious assembly ones as well as these public and private properties outside of religious assembly uses. So I'm happy to answer other questions on the details but this is kind of a broad overview. So temporary one-year term extension for an additional year, they would have to vacate that site for an entire year in order to establish it again on that premises if it went for a two-year timeframe. There are zoning districts that are specified in the draft ordinance and those are most of the commercial zoning districts as well as parks and public facilities. I will note a couple of things here. This does not include some of the beach commercial districts nor does it include the downtown districts. And so that's something for the council to consider. Of course, the council has flexibility to provide direction on any of the topics that we're talking about this evening. And then in addition to the zoning district criteria, there is a 25-foot setback from residential, a quarter-mile locational criteria from transit and a half-mile locational criteria from other encampments or safe parking areas. So both proximity to transit and separation from one another. The uses here cannot displace other primary uses while those uses are required. And so I mentioned in the religious assembly ordinance draft that a camp or safe parking area could locate in a parking lot, for example, and they wouldn't have an issue with the displacement of that parking. In this ordinance, it's set up such that it could not displace a required use. And so an example of that would be if there's a restaurant that's open from, let's say 10 in the morning until six in the evening, the camp couldn't operate in required parking areas for that restaurant during the time that that restaurant is open. It could operate outside of those times or if the restaurant has excess parking, then it could operate in those areas. And so that's a distinction between the two ordinances that I wanted to call out to your attention. There are, we were working very fast over the past couple of weeks trying to get this to you. And two things came to my attention after this ordinance was drafted and went out in your packet and that's under the considering adding, or excuse me, consider adding bullet here. And the first is that we included in the religious assembly section that no parking is required for the encampment itself. And we don't really have a use, a parking requirement in the zoning ordinance that aligns with this. And the council may want to consider adding that provision that no parking would be required for this use in and of itself. And second, we realized as we started doing some of the locational analysis that some of the public properties that are under consideration are not within those specified zoning districts. And so the council may want to consider adding a provision that says for public property that could be, these could be allowed through this process in any zoning district. So a couple of things for the council to consider that were not included as part of your packet. Apologies for that as we were trying to get everything together in a hurry. As far as the process goes, the ordinance requires an outreach meeting before the application is submitted. That would be noticed to individuals within 500 feet, both owners and occupants of the selected site. It requires that a community advisory committee be established to help address any issues that may arise from the operations of the camp and bring those back to the management so that those can be addressed. And then it has operational standards built in. The operational standards and the operational plan must be approved by the city manager. So there are a set of standards that would have to be adhered to that the city manager would develop. And then each location would have to develop a plan that shows adherence to that. Similar to the religious assembly, there would be a maximum of 50 occupants, again, no accompanied minors. And the process here would be an administrative use permit. There is no hearing associated with an administrative use permit. It can be approved administratively. However, those are appealable to the planning commission and city council. So as this ordinance is written, that's the process that it would go through. Two other things that I would add here. One, we do have a map of the specified zoning districts here. If the council is interested in that, we can pull that up and show you the distribution of those. Again, with them being commercial areas, they are distributed throughout much of the community, but not the entirety of the community. And certainly the council has the flexibility to change which districts these could be allowed in. And then finally, in terms of the process for you all to consider this evening, you ask that we bring it back as expeditiously as possible a couple of weeks ago. And that's why we're here tonight. We have two options that you could follow. One would be the referral of this ordinance to the planning commission. Changes to the zoning ordinance require that the planning commission provides a recommendation to the council and then it would come back to the council, so that would be the council's first reading. And then second, the council has the opportunity to pursue an urgency ordinance. That would require five votes of the council, but that could allow for the ordinance to take effect immediately. And then we could come back with the regular process of going through the planning commission and the city council. So thank you. Can you speak to the thing that you just passed? I will, yeah. I'll do it, yeah. So yeah, thank you, Leigh on that. You're welcome, thank you. Okay, and so to Leigh's final point about, we have a question over here. Good question, Leigh, how much is it to appeal to appeal the use termination criteria and the administrative use permit? So it's roughly $600 is an appeal cost for applications is the current cost. So that is the same price it would be for going to planning commission, also appealable to city council. The zoning administrator does have the ability, according to the code, to refer items directly to the planning commission. And so there is that opportunity that these such requests to be sent to the planning commission first. Certainly there is also an opportunity should the council choose to do so, to build in as part of the code provisions here. If the council wanted to hear all of these directly, they could say that they could directly, the ordinance be drafted such that these permits do not go through the standard temporary, temporary administrative use permit process that would go to the zoning administrator and the planning commission council. You could say, bring these directly to the council and we could build those provisions into the code such that it aligns with the other locations where the process would otherwise be called for. And then I just have a quick question. So for clarification, this is the sort of the overlay of staff and I appreciate you within the short timeframe informing informed by the Seattle ordinance but to the original proposal by council member Glover, Crone and Brown, is that where we're at? So it's the sort of the Seattle kind of reconciliation there. Okay. That's correct. And as I mentioned, there are some differences between those, the zoning districts, for example, but the council, it's their purview to make changes as they see fit. Okay. Thank you. Any other questions? Okay, I just have a question. Question? Council member Meyers and then council member Meyers. Just one quick question. We were just handed out. It's titled an interim urgency, emergency ordinance. I'm just curious in the staff report, it refers to it as an interim urgency ordinance. It's the same thing. It's the same thing. We just use a different word. Thank you. And I can talk through that or I can wait until there's questions. Well, council member Matthews and then council member Brown. I had just one question on the religious organizations. It says allowed by right, no permitting. That seems like a stretch to me personally. And then it says the operations plan must be approved. Use termination criteria. How do you terminate something that you don't have a permit for? So the way the ordinance is set up is that there are operational standards that would need to be approved. And if you want to go back, let's see one slide. So the operations plan must be approved. So that is essentially the only approval. It is administrative approval. If it's the council's will, we could certainly set up a process for that. And again, I believe this is something that was similar to what Seattle had developed. And it's also sort of stemming from, we have provisions in our current code and our current camping ordinance to allow for a minimal number of RVs to be located on a church facility. And so this would expand that significantly. And should the council choose to do so, you could require, for example, the same use permit process, administrative use permit. It wouldn't be a temporary use permit. It would be just a straight up administrative use permit because it could be ongoing. And again, the council could say if it's their desire that they would want that referred directly to the council and we could draft the code to respond to that. I'll just say the current allowance for church parking is what three cars? I think it's three vehicles. And up to 50 occupants is a big leap. Very significant difference. And also people in all the best intentions can propose operations plans and they can get approved and they can just like not pan out the way people hoped. And so I mean, my feeling is there has to be some kind of permitting and a little more structure to that. And we'll have a chance to discuss that. So at this point, if there's any other questions for Lee and council member Brown and then I'll let, we'll move on to the conclusion of the presentation. So I'm trying to get a better understanding of when we talk about zoning districts for public property, where those are, what those are. I mean, I have a kind of an abstract sense of that but you did mention that it's possible to look at a map. Is that, can that happen now pretty easily? Sure, we can do that. Let me say two things. It's on the server under. While they're working on that, I will say that the, one of the things that we recognized after drafting this was with it applying to both public and private property and starting to look at some of the properties that were under consideration. Some of the public properties have, for example, residential designations and those aren't on that list. They have the Warfjord down south of Depot Park that was pointed out by Bonnie. That actually has multiple zoning district designations including a like beach tourist residential commercial designation that isn't on that list. And yes. Is this the one? Specifically identified, the latest one, that'll do it. Yeah, so this, thank you. This is the, just the zoning districts that were identified and you can see, they generally mirror our commercial areas as well as the parks and public facilities. Again, the council can expand that out. And certainly we would want the council to strongly consider whether or not for public properties, it would be any designation. We of course wouldn't want the council to say, this is the, we found the perfect public property and now we need to go back and amend the ordinance and wait on that. So that may be something the council would want to consider is not having zoning requirements on the public properties and then for private properties that's up to your discretion as well. Any other questions? Okay, just a quick one. I am guessing that by private properties you would include property owned by non-profit organizations. That's correct. There is not a distinction between non-profit or just a business use or a vacant site. All those are potential locations and as structured it would be confined by the zoning designations. Okay, thank you very much, Lee, for walking through it. Quite complex and as you heard, I mean, we really had to move very quickly and I just really an excellent work product, especially considering this is less than a handful of work days pulling this together. And so I did just want to clarify a couple of procedural pathways that council may take related to this. Lee did talk about this, but you have the actual ordinance, a regular ordinance that was part of your agenda packet. What we sent around right now was a version adapted that could serve as an in-term emergency or urgency ordinance and that's when Lee said that if council wished to adopt that two night, that could happen with a vote of five members of the council. You could do that or you could do the other one or just the other one. So as Lee said, because this would amend Title 24, this requires a hearing at the Planning Commission. So all council could do tonight with a regular ordinance would be to refer that to the Planning Commission, which would then agendize it, duly take it up, have it public hearing and then return it to you with recommendations for potentially a first reading. And then as you know with ordinances, you have a first reading and typically two weeks later, a second reading unless you modify it substantially. And then if you would finally adopt it, it's effective 30 days later. So it does build in different timelines. So that's why pursuant to the conversation at the last meeting talking about how quickly could this move forward and could a declaration of an emergency, expedite things, we presented these dual pathways. So you could consider that. Okay, and now we are moving on to the next portion of the staff presentation tonight. And here you will hear very in-depth from Suzy O'Hara, again our assistant to the city manager, talking about policy and process around transitional encampments. All right, well thank you. So obviously a ton of information in front of you and then also really a sense with our current situation in our community, we're at a crisis moment here with regard to homelessness. We're trying to really balance the sense of urgency around what to do with the gateway encampment, how to expend the substantial amount of money that's coming from the state in the most effective way. How do we balance that sense of urgency with a process for which we can get to community acceptance and buy in around solutions. And so those questions really came up in my mind since the last meeting and how I went about kind of educating myself as to process and what other cities have done that have seen success with transitional encampments has lead me to presenting these slides here this evening. So just to reiterate, conditions at the gateway encampment require immediate action. There's an urgent need to close the camp. We heard from our fire chief as well as our public health officer around the conditions out there. That is reiterated with residents at the encampment as well. There's a lot of concerns that I've heard from camp residents as to those conditions and really fearful about what that means in terms of their health and safety as well. However, long-term success around homeless solutions requires data-driven study of feasible options, community engagement and acceptance and a socially equitable approach. And I'm gonna be talking about that process. Good governance takes time to understand our needs, evaluate options and build community acceptance. And I really are approached to implementing the city County Joint Action Plan and bringing these immediate short-term alternatives and also thinking of long-term alternative shelter modeling and homelessness programs in general really must balance that sense of urgency and good governance. And with that, as I mentioned at the beginning of this slide, I really did dig deeper into what other cities have done to try to do both of those things, balance urgency and good governance. So in my analysis, since the last time we met, we've actually, I've done a lot of work and I wanted to share with you kind of what I've learned. And those process steps included meeting with interested in community members, including the gateway encampment residents, which I alluded to earlier in the presentation, to discuss needs and understanding how those needs match up with our alternative shelter model ideas that are coming to council and before you right now. Learn more, have a deeper understanding of transitional encampments with regard to siding and operational standards and then go even deeper. So I did mention at the last meeting that I met with the city of Portland, really did wanna reach out firsthand to the city of Eugene and I had an opportunity to do that last week and take a deeper dive into the process for which Seattle has gone about really thinking about alternative shelter models in innovative ways, but also in a very practiced and regimented fashion as well. So getting to those process steps, meeting the first one, meeting with interested community members, including the gateway encampment residents. So on March 8th, I and Megan Bunch, who's come on to help with all work with regard to the homeless situation, held this engagement meeting with a camp council. Five people from different backgrounds, we met for about an hour last week, really did give me a strong sense of understanding of a few things. One, there's consistent opinion that the conditions at the camp have become pretty untenable from the perspective of a lot of people coming in. So if you think about kind of the populations in different ways, the council that we met with really did identify as a community, as a family, of really wanting to have structure and accountability around the camp and really were endeavoring to try to self manage in some way, but have been completely overwhelmed by the number of people that have come in and the conditions that are present. A lot of illicit activity and drug use and what I heard from them was that they don't find that acceptable either and want to have an opportunity to help the city and the county think about different models that would be most effective for the community that they've built there. So in addition to that, Megan and I met with Curtis who's here tonight last week to talk about some of his aspirations for what he would like to bring to our discussions around alternative shelter models and what I took from that conversation is there's a lot of interest in behalf of our community to help build these programs together. I think there's an investment on behalf of this core group of folks that I met with at the camp and other people that are invested in successful outcomes and really thinking about community building from the perspective of our shared space and shared values and thinking about how best to build community in that way. So that was a really important conversation as well. I will note, based on those conversations, there's a lot of interest in supportive and structured, in a supportive instructor, sorry, structured transitional encampment, tongue twister, but what I heard from this camp council is that there's a strong interest in accountability and they want to have that also be part of the program. And so we will continue to conduct these engagement meetings and what I did learn last week was a strong interest in collaborating and partnering to conduct this outreach and engage with more folks in the encampment as well, which has been a struggle for Megan and I to think about when we roll through there, getting people to come out and talk to us is somewhat challenging. And so really being able to rely on the community there to help us engage with folks is gonna be very important. So second on the list, learn more about transitional encampments and this is really from the perspective of citing and operational standards and then also what other communities have done to build their programs and really learn through that process of community engagement and buy-in as they've developed like for instance, the city of Seattle as they develop these ordinances that are now in place. So on March 1st and 6th and 11th, I met with Brent Adams who's here tonight who has been a strong proponent of sanctuary camps and now transitional encampments to really understand program model, citing performance metrics. And I've invited him tonight to talk about those things. And so I'm gonna yield the microphone to Mr. Adams who's here up in the front. And he'll take a few minutes to go through his slides and really trying to orient the council to what really we're talking about as it relates to transitional encampments. Mayor, council, thank you, Vice Mayor. Some of you who've been following along might realize how landmark this is. I wanna thank Drew Glover and the Sinies, Chris Cron and Susie Brown, especially Susie for really doing this deep dive and Lee, great work on this. Also, very proud of this city government for taking this on. So I'm not gonna give an anecdote but I've been traveling to the transitional encampments for many years since 2012. And the reason I become an inherent of them is because I watched them as sort of, maybe renegade looking encampments on church properties. And I had kept going year after year to watch them built up to the point where they're actually part of the city structure of Seattle and Eugene now. And you'll see them year after year getting bigger to the point where they had to move around every three months. And now finally they can stay on city property year round. So just watching every year the ordinance changes and watch the beneficial nature to the point where now those 10 camps are beginning to become tiny house villages. And it's just, I've been completely committed watching people grow and then watching the data as people move out of these programs. So of course, a lot of what I'm doing here is a little bit redundant but it's actually from kind of what I see the nonprofits up there doing. This is not necessarily all part of the ordinance or what you're deciding on but it's kind of what we see, what we brought together as the sanctuary camp model. What are the most successful programs up there and how are those programs designed from the operator standpoint? So as I see it, transitional encampment is the city or county permitted nonprofit operated community of soft-shelled or rigid structures on private or public land with food preparation and meeting spaces and an in-camp government structure and community outreach program. Now the hallmarks and these are a little mind blowing for me and which is why I'm so committed to them. People transition to better circumstances at a higher rate out of these transitional encampments and I'm happy to show data a little bit later. Most cost efficient sheltering model and I really wanna help you to ask yourself about the bang for the buck. What are we paying for when we, even when programs are putting people on the pathway to housing, what is the cost breakdown per person, especially when you take a program wide and how many people actually did get into housing. So we should really be that critical now. No increase in crime wherever they're located. That's really controversial but the way that happens is it creates community within the population as well as it strengthens the larger community and that's really one of the ways that crime is not increased and actually decreases. Also promotes interpersonal healing for all the residents inside. So there are some quotes from the permanent encampment and valuation report from the city of Seattle, dated June 28th of 2017. Here's a quote, Seattle police department has been collecting data and information about the levels of crime that occur around the permanent encampments. This data shows that there is no significant increase in crime and that is really, that's ridiculously important to put a pin in. So the agreements, again, this is for the people who are in the encampment, the residents, we call them rules. One of the most common is that these camps have allowed the residents with the encampment to engage in volunteer service rather than hiring out or paying, having paid staff for all of the elements. Every resident would do 10 hours of service per week within the program. Think downtown streets team only maybe cheaper with an encampment model. So imagine people walking around the neighborhood with a orange vest and a flashlight, a clipboard or a garbage cleaner upper. And so that actually communicates to the neighborhood that these people are taking care of the neighborhood. That's how, and also people staff the front gate, keep things clean in the kitchen and really keep the place tidy and well-operating. Of course, no drug alcohol use, no weapons, no violence, no theft. Those are, that can be a zero, those are often no zero tolerance elements, no aggressive behavior, all the way down to the end. And people must participate in a case management program. Here a little quote here, residents hold each other accountable for individual actions. A grievance procedure is used to resolve conflicts. Some suggested resident criteria, and this is really important to my mind, a three tier admittance for access to this. For instance, some of these encampments that we've seen locally, people move from out of the area when they hear it or they see it on the news. It should always be stated that for a transitional encampment, it's for the people who are here if we're gonna engage in this sort of thing, we're not trying to put the welcome mat for people to come from out of the area. In fact, that's one of the reasons that some of these encampments have failed in years past. For instance, in Placerville because it went out on the news that there's this camp. So you really wanna take care of the population who are local here. Of one month trial period, here we have one month, six months, three months. By that three month, you're really trying to help people transition into a better space. If requested, residents must comply with the background check or your analysis. That's not normally a factor, but if you're having problems with drug alcohol within the encamp, that's a really strong conversation to have. Basic infrastructure, a lot of these things are in the thing before you, a camp management plan. I'll scale all the way down to tents on platforms with rain shedding. Now, this is the most basic shelter concept. Of course, it's our camping tent, but that's not really good enough over time. You need it up on a platform with something that's gonna shed water away from it. So water and sun really are never affecting it. You could have a much longer life. Food preparation, that's really important. In fact, in all communities, in all our houses, our homes are located around the hearth. People sharing food with one another. That's one of the most healing community things that can happen. We wanna make sure that people are able to share food, that if we have ABT cards, or people wanna bring food into the space, that's not off to the corner, that's right fixed in the middle. Of course, meeting areas, because there's one of the requirements for most of these transit encampments up north are regular in-camp meetings. Also front desk, that's critical. People shouldn't be able to just kinda waltz in. There's a 24-hour gate there with usually a volunteer. They're 24 hours a day to make sure that people can't just come in or somebody with a camera. During business hours, people can come in with a guide and take a tour. Next slide. So the operator, that's in this case a nonprofit or a church in-camp governance. So the nonprofit or faith community, whoever's going to apply for this permit would, in a transitional encampment, affirms the agreements that we just listed ahead of earlier. Affirm the agreement enforcement. How do you enforce rules? Do you, and a lot of that is, some of those are really easy. For instance, if you have like a handle of vodka or a syringe, that's gonna flag and the nonprofit's gonna have to have a meeting with this person. But if it's violence or theft or something like that, that's a zero tolerance moment. They have tasks to be addressed immediately. The nonprofit can work with the camp residents in this manner. Also all the way down provides onsite manager, including that could be a camp resident, but always there's always management happening 24 hours a day. There's always a responsible person on duty. It's never just kind of opened to the whims of people. Encampment community meetings. Now this is really important where people have some say in their community. When you hear a lot of these transitional comments are kind of like it's self-managed. They're not really self-managed to the point where they can just move it down the street or these in-camp meetings are usually consensus-based. For instance, in most community houses, we do have weekly meetings, monthly meetings. This is really to talk about social issues or how to deal with problems within the camp and also allows them to have a representation so they can bring it to some of the, this community advisor community or the city or how to interact with the nonprofit. The Casework program, this is really key in actually the success hallmarks is that people are there, but how do you benefit them? How do they move from one place to another when they're moving to a better space when they exit the encampment? So target goals and this could, this would actually be a professional staff, some of these encampments use college interns to help manage this, but we're focusing on housing, sobriety, education, employment opportunities and mental and physical health, but it really gets people working towards attainable goals. That's really important. Also improving the circumstances when it's time for them to move out of the encampment. Operator responsibilities is the nonprofit responsibilities. Lee mentioned community outreach meetings and community advisory committee. Before you site locate any of this into a neighbor, you just don't want to plunk this down on a city property without meeting with the neighborhood first. So I think that's actually in the plan that you're looking at, but it's really important to bring the community in, to have them and also see clearly what's being proposed, but there would also be individuals from the neighborhood around who are from stakeholder groups in the advisory community. So you have, it's like a bicameral government governance that there are meetings within the camp, meetings outside of the camp and sometimes you get together and have a larger meeting. All the way down data collection. This is really important in fact to show efficacy and this is one of the reasons I'm most committed to this because we're watching people move out of homelessness through these. So you have entrance data coming in, exit data and then data about case management. Here's another quote. The governance management model creates shared power and decision making structure where residents participate in the adoption and enforcement of policy, assist with security and property maintenance and share the experience and expertise with their peers. There's a mentoring that can go on. Here's some data. This is from, you'll see to the right there source reports from the Eugene city manager's office, 2017. Also from a city of Washington, they have a permitted campment evaluation that came out in 2017. This is about data that they produced in 2016. I think this is really critical. In fact, when we look at that, so you'll see the blue and the red there, Seattle and Eugene. So those are different sets of data. Eugene only has the exit data but Seattle has some intake data there. I think it's really, really critical to note that people are, they're coming in from the street or from the shelter. Those are the large numbers there under Seattle intake and they're exiting in the next column largely to permanent housing and transitional housing. They're not going back into a shelter or largely back onto the street. So highly beneficial here. Also Eugene, look, they're exiting largely into permanent housing. Also down to the right here. So I'm talking about bang for the buck for a program like this. It says cost per person exited from the program. And this is, these are yearly totals. So it only costs 2,300 essentially per person. And the city of Seattle, it was paying about 85% of those budgets. And then the next one is the cost per person exiting to permanent, permanent, permanent supported housing, permanent housing. So the number of people that year who exited to housing divided by the cost of the program. And I think that's a really good bang for the buck. When you think about the cost of programs and how many people are actually moving into housing. We talk about permanent supported housing, housing first quite a bit that programs want to put people on the pathway to housing. Here's a real good example of a program that is doing that and that the cost is in line. And it's a little, you know, with something that's a little more sane. Last slide. So it's really important to, if we're going to do this, this is a novel approach, of course. It's a little controversial, but I've seen dozens of these up in the Northwest. So I'm wondering how can we have something so effervescent and perfect in Santa Cruz? One way is through community acceptance. Of course, it's through these resident and neighborhood outreach meetings. Of course, I direct the storage program operated by the warming center. And we had some neighborhood meetings, some meetings with the neighborhood tenants, lots of meetings with the landlord prior to citing that. And that's really why we've been so successful. So in a camp like this, you really want to have the neighborhood engaged. Also the community advisory community that we mentioned earlier, that the neighborhood stakeholders become a little bit responsible for the success also. Hallmarks, let's revisit those. People transition to better circumstances at a higher rate. We've seen that now. It's most cost-effective sheltering model, especially when you're talking about large shelters. No increase in crime wherever they're located. It creates community within as it strengthens the larger community and promotes interpersonal healing. So what we're proposing is a pilot camp to start with. Of course, there's a longer track that's being proposed, a permitted, how to get something that's a permitted and a certified transitional encampment. But what about first a pilot camp project to show the beneficial nature that can produce data right from the beginning? Now Seattle and Eugene had some timelines of acceptance. They started small. They could only be in a space for nine months. And finally, they can be there all year round. They could only be in certain areas of the city. Now they can be in any area of the city. So they really built from something small. But do you want to do that in Santa Cruz also? Start with the pilot project. So this is a very innovative approach. So let's be cautious and measured and start with some community input. Have some of these community meetings. And thanks for the time. I appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you, Brad. I really appreciate it. So as you can imagine in these conversations I had with Brent over the last couple of weeks, really thought provoking around process and how did these communities that have made a significant investment into really innovating around alternative shelter models. How long did that take? How did they engage with their community? And then how did they end up with these ordinances that we're reflecting on today? So kind of the second and third step of this process and to include more voices in the conversation was to dig in deeper with transitional encampments with regard to the city of Seattle and King County and then also having a conversation with a council member in Eugene, which I had a couple, I guess, two Fridays ago. Brent mentioned the King County evaluation. I did go deeper into that and really looked at what were their recommendations as to process? And so mind you, it's been 10 years that the city of Seattle has been going through this process with I think three or four iterations of their ordinance to get to a place that works in their community from the perspective of really seeing effective programs that the community can touch, feel, learn and listen and have data to support their success. And once those programs were up and running, really being able to model those programs in other parts of the community. So what I gleaned from that research was, as Brent is mentioning, pilot first, be very small scale at the beginning and really the city of Seattle leaned heavily on their faith-based community. They had a number of faith-based organizations that were interested in helping with that. Having those proponents, having people that were really spearheading that process made a big difference for them in terms of siting and operational capacity. They also built community understanding and acceptance before making any sweeping policy changes. So had community task force really focused on how do we as a community really engage the entire network of stakeholders around solutions. Those processes took years, years, figuring out how best to move forward with transitional encampments and other alternative shelter models. And then really develop clear and measurable performance metrics for clients and neighborhood compatibility. So if you think about those four bullet points, the top two really focused on the homeless individuals that are at the camp thinking of how best to serve them so they can by virtue of what the camp is supposed to do transition out of the camp into a better living situation. And then also looking at from a public safety kind of neighborhood compatibility perspective, how do, is there positive encampment neighborhood interactions and then really focused on crime and safety. And then lastly, I just wanted to mention I did have a conversation with a council member in the city of Eugene. What I did not know when I reached out to him is that he was the council member who's really spearheaded many of these efforts with the city of Eugene. Same exact information as King County, city of Seattle, pilot first, small scale, a quote that he gave me which I thought was really interesting that I wanted to share with you is to go slow to go fast, really think about developing a program for which you can educate yourself on how that program might fit and then once you have some success, build from there. So in addition to that, in thinking about, okay, so I've come to the conclusion that it makes a lot of sense to pilot and this is based on my engagement with the gateway encampment and also in discussions with Brent, how do we balance this kind of potentially, urgently moving forward with a program that really meets the needs that the council is trying to meet in terms of innovating and moving forward swiftly in a time of crisis with how do we actually build a sustainable program that really gets to larger questions in our community about compatibility? And I did find a study that was conducted for the city of Oakland. They were back in 2014, 2015 dealing with significant issues around unsanctioned encampments and did contract with the Goldman School of Public Policy at UC Berkeley to develop a study for which they were looking at alternatives to unsanctioned encampments. Highly recommend you read this study. It is exactly what we're experiencing right now and I really drew upon it to think about process for which we can get to community acceptance and those process steps include conducting a needs assessment. So this is across your house and unhoused populations, evaluate policy alternatives based on specific criteria, thinking effectiveness, social equity and implementation feasibility and then developing short to long-term solutions to improve the status quo and I'm gonna go through those. So that first step, conduct a needs assessment. So we really, I mean I have seen through my unique experience out at the encampment and I know many have those same experiences. We need to understand our population. The gateway encampment is one specific population. It does serve as generally speaking what we see across our community. We need to understand the basic needs of the individuals we're trying to serve better. So the number of unsheltered homeless population. We also need to understand what our current sheltering portfolio looks like and how it fits into the continuum of care. We wanna quantify the resources that we as a city currently expend on managing unsanctioned campments in our street homeless population. Getting deeper into understanding the needs of the unsheltered population according to many of these things here from security to utilities to social services, privacy, stability. When you have an opportunity to quantify and actually discuss those issues you can get a better understanding of what people's needs are and how best to serve them. And then also understanding the needs of our house community as well. That's equally important in terms of the neighbors and businesses and folks that are living within our community that are impacted by its unsanctioned encampments specifically. We wanna evaluate policy alternatives based on specific criteria and that is really the degree to which the policy in question addresses the immediate problems associated with these encampments comprehensively across both in short and long-term solutions. You need to look at how you're preempting complaints from your house residents, the use of city staff time. You also need to look that whether you're not just simply offloading this burden onto a different jurisdiction. Are you meeting public health standards for outdoor spaces? Are you meeting health and safety needs for and long-term housing needs for the marginalized residents that you're focused on? Equity. So this in terms of social equity is really looking at measuring the differential consequences of a policy on different stakeholders or constituents. In other words, is this intervention likely to have a disproportionate impact either positive or negative in any particular group in Santa Cruz? And you need to focus on everybody who's impacted. The unsheltered population, your house residents, your business and property owners in Santa Cruz and city staff. And I pulled this quote out of the report because I think it's a really important way to think about it. So the issue of homeless encampments inherently encompasses a trade-off between some individuals right to live where they choose here in Santa Cruz with others' rights to be free of nuisance to the extent that the cost of such freedoms does not hurt the others. And we get down to the third, the implementation feasibility and that's the city's capacity to implement each alternative according to its original design. And it's really important to think about this within the context of, yes, we have significant influx of state funding. Yes, we're particularly in a crisis right now with this gateway encampment, but are the programs that we're considering actually gonna be feasible for the long-term? And you wanna think about kind of how the systems work together, that relative measure of fiscal feasibility. What is our long-term fiscal strategy for funding these programs likely buy in from the homeless individuals that you're focused on and then these group dynamics between encampment groups and service providers and city staff, those connections need to be maintained throughout this entire process. Last process step, develop short to medium and long-term solutions. Generally speaking, your short-term, better coordination. Let's not duplicate efforts. Let's make sure that all of the partners that are involved are working together and as Chief Hayduth demonstrated, I think we're moving towards that right now with the web EOC model and our ongoing conversations on the two-by-two, increase public awareness and build a pilot, medium-term, develop new stakeholder relationships and identify champions. This is a regional statewide nationwide crisis and the city is not going to solve these issues on our own. We must engage with partnership. We must lean on other jurisdictions and other nonprofit and faith-based organizations to help us with this. And so in thinking about long-term strategies, it's really important to think about that. And then also long-term, consider new citywide policies to lower barriers for innovation and sustainable approaches. Long-term process for which, yes, let's tackle thinking about ordinances and changes to our mini-codes to think about how to lower those barriers for innovation. But that's really long-term after we think about these short and medium-term and how we're trying to be really pragmatic about building some shared understanding and knowledge, building off success and engaging with our community partners. I think that's it. I'm gonna turn over to Tina. We're almost done. So I just wanna have a few key takeaways before I move on to the staff recommendations. And really thinking Susie for that research, both in person at the encampment, you heard over multiple days, multiple stakeholders, talking to folks in other communities, exhaustive research, reading things. I mean, she has really put a lot on the line to deliver this information. So I do wanna recognize her. But through this, I received an education around what it takes to realize success in this area because we have two things facing Santa Cruz. One, we have this intractable long-term problem of solving homelessness, which no one has done anywhere in America yet. And you spoke to this. And then we also have this urgency of dealing with the encampment. And I think to resolve both at one blow or one set of policies is likely not the best solution for the city of Santa Cruz, not in the inclusive way, not thinking about all the partnerships, all the people that wanna have a voice in this conversation either. So reflecting on that, I was really struck by this sense of we need a balanced approach, highlighting ideas and going, what is it, go slow to go fast? That really struck me as well. And so these are, I think, really good lessons we can take away from this. The socially equitable approach of recognizing that everyone has a role in our community and everyone should be at the table, not just thinking about one group or another. And then finally, just a note about process and slowing down. We have really have been hurtling very quickly over the past three council meetings to the exclusion of a lot of other things. And knowing that things are a priority, also it does come into sacrifice for really in depth research. We've done not the community outreach, not withstanding the excellent work of the encampment. It was some already engaged people, but we haven't even had any opportunity to talk with others or have a broader community conversation. And that's worrying when we're talking about major changes for our community. And so we would ask for that consideration as the city moves forward. Let's pace out the work. Let's focus on actionable solutions, things that we can tackle and take things in a sequence. And we're very motivated or very dedicated to this work, as you can see up here. And then other staff that are watching it and participated. And so we want to honor this work and we want to do it well. We don't want to crash and burn. So those are some just parting thoughts I want to say with thanks again to Susie. And so then marching through some staff recommendations. So you have recommendations that appeared on the report that was published on Thursday. And we have a refinement on that we'd like to suggest. The first being that knowing the urgency of the health and safety, the crisis, the inconceivable conditions down at the encampment. We do recommend trying to push toward another deadline for closure. And that being to coincide with April 17th, which is when 1220 River Street is slated to open. And then knowing that to hit that target something else has to happen. We've talked before that we need to find alternatives for the individuals who are sleeping at the encampment. And notwithstanding 1220 River opening very aggressively it having capacity of 60, we still think we need around 40. And so we have to do something to meet that need. And looking and you heard through the extensive research and other presentations that we think there's a couple of avenues council could think about there. One being a small scale pilot program of either a transitional encampment or a safe sleeping in storage site, which is basically a very basic desk to dawn program that Suzie spoke about in your last council meeting, which is just literally a place you can come, be safe at night and we can store your possessions for you during the day. But we have to create some additional capacity in within the system with inner city in order for us to be able to successfully close the encampment. Also the third bullet here, we presented at the last meeting the transitional encampment project charter. A lot of thought went into that, a lot of process. And I feel like the values in there in the process was solidified with this additional work you've done looking at Eugene and Seattle and that report out of UC Berkeley and the Goldman School of Public Policy. So we think that we should, that should be brought forward as maybe a good pathway in a model and also consider including safe parking. And then the fourth bullet, something that another thing that emerged in our research was that some communities have done shelter feasibility evaluations to really look at what are the needs of our community. So we have a better way to project what we think we will need because right now we can look at the hard numbers. Well, the 2017 point in time count said there were 1,204 people homeless in the city of Santa Cruz. The survey data yielded that about 78, 80% of those were unsheltered, therefore about 963 people are unsheltered. But that hard number doesn't tell the full story. Not only is it not really achievable, but also it doesn't tell the whole story of where the need is and what that might look like. So something we found that's very interesting is pursuing the idea of a shelter feasibility evaluation. And then also an unsanctioned encampment management plan. And I will note this was a feature of the city county joint action plan saying that we need to be able to think in the future and how are we gonna resolve the next encampment that comes up. So we don't have another gateway encampment situation where we find ourselves in this very, very difficult situation and people living in very difficult conditions. So we think that this work should continue. And then I'll find, or two more, immediately support the association of faith communities safe parking program by identifying a city parking lot to be included in the satellite program. So they've asked us for this. Currently they have a rotation of, I forget how many churches around the county. Do you recall? So it's the new program. So they have an indoor shelter satellite program that's I think about a dozen churches. The safe parking program I think is up to 15 churches and they have asked both the city and the county to support that satellite program with one parking lot each. For how many vehicles? The program is anywhere between two and five vehicles depending on the space. And then finally adopting the revised shelter crisis declaration. So to square this full slide of recommendations with what I just said about slowing down to go fast and being thoughtful and deliberate, we think our efforts are best focused on trying to resolve the 40 additional beds we need. And so we'd ask for that space and in your direction on how to best go about that. So with that, I think we will conclude our staff presentation with great thanks to Susie and to all the other speakers. And thank you, Brian, as well. Thank you. Thank you so much for your comprehensive presentation. And our city attorney, Tony Condati for drafting all of the ordinances with my apologies. Thank you all for your work on this. We very much so acknowledge it was short time and turn around and appreciate your comprehensive report and work. At this time, I had originally asked that council member Glover hold his presentation but I'm wondering if we could do that after public comment first originally proposed. Knowing that you'd still be able to get that in. Yeah, it's mainly, I mean, the purpose of it is to educate the community before public comment because of how we had it structured from your email. So this way it'll provide, it's a short presentation and give us some information and then we can go from there because I'm sure we all have a lot of presentation in our mind now. So if it's okay with you, just a quick. No, definitely. We'll go ahead and move forward as originally planned, being mindful of the time and interest in public comment. City manager, Bernal, would you pass me the clicker? Oh, she has it there, right? Back computer. Wonderful, so good evening everyone and thank you for being here and thank you to the staff for that amazing compilation presentation such a short turnaround. Lee, great, Susie, amazing. Brent, thank you for the input. The city attorney, everybody involved, city manager's office really, really impressive and see what you can do with that speed is amazing. So I'm just gonna talk really quickly about the safe parking and transitional and caments and how we can consider them. I identified four additional locations outside of the ones that were recommended by staff just to be able to talk about briefly as well as give some background as to what's been going on in Santa Cruz. They're just for the record so that people know this is not the first time that there's been the conversation of safe parking programs in Santa Cruz in general. It's actually been a topic of conversation for years now so it's nice to see that we're actually taking steps to move on it. For many parking and camping programs are the only way to keep a family unit together. I think that's really important to acknowledge because we do have families that are experiencing homelessness, especially in the absence of affordable housing which we direly lack here in Santa Cruz. Without access to legal parking programs, vulnerable people are subject to fines and criminalization. Those fines can impact their credit scores and then damage their ability to move into housing after the stint of experiencing homelessness is over. And this is a great opportunity to make a considerable impact on the population of people living unsheltered in Santa Cruz. So we just heard Assistant City Manager Shull just cite this number so just so everyone knows that as a 2017 there were an estimated 963 people sleeping without shelter in Santa Cruz on any given night. We know that those counts are under representative of the actual quantity of people in Santa Cruz because it's a point in time count which takes place over a very short period of time on one day of the year. So it's important for us to acknowledge that. Of the people in the entire county which is about 2,200 people experiencing homelessness, 30% of them are sleeping in their vehicles at night. This includes students and people that are working homeless. Also out of all of the individuals in the county there are 129 families. So like I mentioned before, the ability to keep families together, mothers, children, parental structures and support systems so they're not being separated because I don't know about you but I'm very much against separating children from their families. Also made up 403 individuals out of those 129 families. So just a quick overview of what safe parking programs are. We heard that briefly before but they're programs that allow for overnight parking to motor vehicles. They usually and typically have a transitional focus that transition people into stable housing and services. Also access to resources and stabilizing the people whose lives have been destabilized by our economic structure. In providing accommodations for those living in the cars, those without housing are given the ability to avoid those steep fines and criminalization like I mentioned before. It also helps the community by reducing the impact on an already burdened law enforcement system. There's a big complaint within community I hear a lot that they don't get responses timely enough from law enforcement. If we can ease their impact from having to deal with parking citations and other kinds of things, we can make it so they can respond to other issues within your communities. Also providing a foundation by which those in difficult situations can attain a permanent employment housing and access to resources which I think we can all agree we wanna be able to offer to people experiencing homelessness. So just an example of some safe parking programs in other cities, here's a list of them that are somewhat close to us just to put it in reference on the west coast of the United States. In Eugene, Oregon, we talked about that before but last year 81 individuals were helped in at least 27 families with 81 children were able to transition out of homelessness or at least be supported by the program. You can check that out with the same Vincent DePaul Society of Lane County in San Diego. It's funded by the city and also Dreams for Change who has managed the multiple safe parking sites since 2009. Without direct oversight from the government the program operates on a relatively light crew achieving much with very little, offers the same similar things to Eugene and also has helped 2,650 people thus far with safe sleeping. And then in Santa Barbara, it's been going on since about 2004 working with nonprofits, churches and businesses providing sanitary facilities, camper screening, placement for its participants in addition to job placement assistance has a shelter for about 150 people a night you can check that out with the Santa Barbara report. So some commonalities between all of the different programs is they incorporate case management to facilitate the moving onto better housing situations the implementation and inclusion of trash disposal services and dumping solutions because I know that's been a concern that's been mentioned by people that have come out in opposition to parking programs also set hours, some programs are open and used by the participants at specific times like a dust till dawn program others may be established more permanently if they're on faith-based communities and then keeping records. Now this is something that is up for discussion but it is something that is used to help to keep track of who's coming in and out of the facilities. So where can they go? We just heard a wonderful presentation from our staff and thank you again to the planning and economic development department for putting together those amazing maps. It allowed for my team and I to dig through some of them to identify some potential locations. Now this one was interesting this is 1214 River Street. The issue here is now after reading the ordinance and some of the language specifications it is in rather close proximity less than half a mile from 1220 River Street in fact it's the next parcel over. I haven't had a chance to talk to staff about what this site actually is used for. It looks like a storage yard for vehicles or something. I've seen shaking heads. This is why I wanted to present it today so we could talk about what it could potentially be used for or hear why it wouldn't work. My estimate based off of the size of those cars it could house maybe eight to 10 vehicles depending on how the structure is set up. Then Broadway and Frederick. Now I noticed on the revised map that y'all provided this strip that was orange in my map wasn't orange in your map. So I don't know what the transition is. This is a strip walkway and parking lot next to the Santa Cruz Bible Church on Frederick Street. So if I were to pull out from this image you would see that the Santa Cruz Bible Church has a huge parking lot. It completely for the most part is empty from every time I drive past on Frederick Street it's predominantly empty. So that could propose to be used either for that strip which to my understanding from the map I got with city owned obscure city owned property which could do maybe eight vehicles but if we partner with the faith communities as was mentioned in the staff report about and the recommendations of leaning heavily quote on our faith communities then that could be a fantastic facility not to mention I've been in that church before and that big building that you see there in the top portion of the image that is a huge hall that is totally potential for shelter space. So the issue there which I wanna address just so that people know that I'm aware and thinking about it is its proximity to Iranagulch. It's very close to Iranagulch basically right across a ravine and then in a neighborhood and close to Galt school as a potential drawback. This is another location on Frederick Street just up the street. So if for some reason the Santa Cruz Bible Church didn't wanna go for it. There's also our Lady Star of the Sea Catholic Church with this amazing parking lot that just sits there empty for most of the week. It has a pretty existing parking lot. We could partner with the faith community and the only con that I was able to identify is its neighborhood proximity and proximity to schools that could be another eight to 15 vehicles. And then this one I couldn't see into and so maybe the staff can let me know about the terrain that's back there. I was able to see along the highway if we go into the street view. This is off of Lee Street and there's at least room for a few tents there along the freeway with some erected fencing and or some mesh to protect the individuals that are camping there. Could have up to 20 tents from the space on Google Maps. Matter on the layout of the facility. The issue there again is proximity to neighborhoods and would require a neighborhood outreach as well as some pretty open communication and problem solving with the people that live there. All in all, if we were to go on the maximum amount of all of those different locations we would be able to identify at least 75 beds where people could sleep and or park their vehicles and stay overnight just on these four sites. And then the proposed structure which has been talked about before interviews before placement, participant agreements, case management, combined crews of limited paid staff and volunteers to manage the cost associated with the implementation of the parking programs. Also making sure there's a lot of public input and review. It's located in the city on city on property and or select property and then may really focusing on the transitional focus. So I know that I wanna thank the mayor for the opportunity to speak but before I transition the public comment I do want to just say that I was encouraged but also dismayed by the language that I received and some of the correspondence that I got with regards to this. On one side of the spectrum and there were people that were really supportive but on the other side it's what I could only really describe as darkness essentially. Not only was there a consistent sentiment that if people can't afford deliver them they should leave but it was really disturbing to hear people saying that they need to register their life history, get fenced into a pen and then tagged with ankle bracelets. So that's really, really scary to hear. And then also an individual, a gentleman wrote to me and said it might be time to quote a culling of the herd. So we just heard a agenda item before this with regards to immigration reform and ICE and the abduction of people and we are at a pivotal moment right now in our history both as a city and as a country and we need to realize that the words that we use are dangerous and powerful if they're used in the wrong way and if we're using these terms to dehumanize people we have to realize that we're not talking about cattle we're not talking about livestock we're talking about people that need our support and are relying on us to figure out solutions so that we can give them the space and their own agency to empower themselves and rejoin our community as productive members of society. So thank you mayor for the opportunity for the presentation. Okay. So at this time I will open it up to public comment. Before I do I just want to acknowledge that the last council meeting we had we went into late in the evening and it was brought to my attention that it felt very undemocratic that having us decide really substantive policy near 1 a.m. was inaccessible for folks whether they were observing from home or here in the council chambers and as both Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and Gandhi have said or observed that the means are the end in democracy and I want to just really highlight I know that's open to interpretation and perspective why this item is brought here in council chambers as opposed to the civic. If we were to hold the session in the civic we would not be able to have the video streaming so folks who regularly watch our council meetings would not be able to access the council meetings. People who have other commitments at home or for other reasons aren't able to come here. So I want to just sort of provide that as a understanding of my decision to hold it here with overflow in the civic to provide more access for folks who are at home. And I want to also try something a little bit different and I want to invite up anybody who wants to self-select as wanting to just briefly share their thoughts and comments with the council and you'll be given one minute to present whatever you want to share briefly and if you want to wait until after we have our group presentations then I will open it up for those who want to speak and stay for the two minutes. So if there's any member of the community here that wants to address the council briefly and recognizing that we're now at 9.30 I will allow you to come forward and you will be given one minute once we are concluding with the folks who are interested in speaking briefly to the council for the one minute time I will then acknowledge these organizations who reached out to me in advance for their presentations and then we'll reopen the opportunity for public comment for two minutes for folks who want to stick around and speak to us at the two minute mark. Council Member Matthews. This is just an honest question. Now what point do you anticipate us trying to get to our discussion? I will and we have about a half hour of public presentations from organizations so I wouldn't anticipate probably for another hour and a half depending on how many people want to address the council. So if you're interested in just speaking to the council for public comment for one minute I want you to please stand to my left and I will start with you and once we are concluded with those folks then we'll go ahead and open it up to group organizations. Please feel free. You'll be given one minute. Hi, my name is Jesse Balzel. I'm a Santa Cruz resident. I am a PhD student in Marine Ecology and Biological Oceanography. I've had several years of experience working in the fields of ecology and environmental science and tonight I'm somewhat of a disappointed voter. I think that it's disappointing that a group of self-styled progressives would mimic Donald Trump's emergency declaration and call for potentially environmentally destructive land grab. I say land grab because this is for all intents and purposes what's being proposed and from what I've heard a residential development. Concentration in hundreds if not thousands of transient people on public lands is incompatible with recreation and it's incompatible with biological diversity. A large and continuous human presence in our parks and our nature spaces will destroy native flora and displaced wildlife. Thank you. And please feel free. You can leave your comments with us. You may not because this is the one minute at a time and if you were interested in staying it would be the two minutes so I apologize but you were welcome to leave your comments with us and we will be able to review them if you're interested in that. Okay, what do I... You will give with our clerk. Thank you very much. So again, this is for folks who just briefly want to use the one minute opportunity. Thank you. Hi, my name is Kim and I want to applaud the council for going with the safe parking program because I know how oppressive it is to be criminalized for sleeping in your vehicle. There's literally no place to sleep in Santa Cruz in a vehicle without getting a ticket and I experienced that firsthand as a homeless person. Concerning the Ross camp, I really feel that the gravel... I went down there, I took a walk down there to Ross camp and there were park rangers that were contemplating dropping some gravel all in that area that would like significantly reduce the health hazard or the health problems that are incurring from the mud that's there from this long-term encampment. They did not ever drop the gravel that day that was going to secure the porta-potties and it really needs to be entirely covered with gravel for the safety of the members there. So I wanted to bring that issue up. It's a very practical thing that the council can move on right away. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Hi, for the sake of time, we'll jump right in. Councilor Mayer, thanks. I am afraid and scared that the city of Seattle is actually used as the model for what we want to do to this town. It's been an absolute disaster up there for the last five years. The Puget Sound Business Journal reports that are approximately one billion dollars. I'm gonna just go ahead. I wanna just remind those that are present here this evening that when somebody is at the podium that they have the opportunity to address the council without interruption and I will stop the time if that happens to you but everybody has a right to address the council whether or not we agree with each other's perspectives. So please allow everybody to speak to the council without disruption. Sir, go right ahead. Thank you, I appreciate it. The crime rates in Seattle are now two and a half times that of LA, four times that of New York. The homeless situation is completely out of control. The drug and addiction problem is completely out of control. This is a potential environmental disaster for our city and as a member of the community and a parent ideal on the west side with an ongoing issue of crime break-ins, the addiction that the doctors spoke of need to be fed. Those addictions are fed through a lot of property crime and why understand there needs to be some compassion associated with this situation. It's a complex one and I appreciate all the work and thought that's gone into it. Expanding these sites, you don't need to be an epidemiologist to understand that you're also exposed. Thank you. You get my point. Thank you. And you'll be given one minute. Good evening, Mayor, Council. Thank you for the opportunity. Suzie, thank you for all the work you put in. I am simply here to urge you to go slow to go fast. This is a long-term issue. Let's take our time. Let's do it right. Get the community engagement. That's the other way. Give people a chance to speak up. Get people engaged besides the folks in the camps. Those that need a chance to get out and are willing to counsel folks that are complaining that the other people aren't letting them do their job, support them, give them a way out. Transitional encampment with precautions. That's great, but let's not rush into it, please. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Council, my name is Coral Brune. I live at the Tannery, which is next to the Ross camp, which I'd like to address three points. Congestion, the very humanity. I'll just go through half of my list of things. I enjoyed the presentations tonight. I learned a lot. Traffic businesses, houses, tents, and not a lot of extra space adding more to this congestion. So that's an obvious situation, more to some than to others. I've talked to some of the persons there and people are suffering. And that is on people's minds a lot. Some of my friends have skills to partially help the situation. If funds are available, they can teach skills to building simple housing structures for the houseless. The surrounding neighborhood that seems to be impoverished by the association of having a type of community, such as homeless, would do themselves a favor to have positive attitudes so that more solutions can be creatively managed in the situation. A few living in the Ross state they know. And please do feel free if you want to email your comments to us as well. I will. Thank you. So next time I'm hoping the public can speak first so it's not this late at night. That'd be wonderful. We're the taxpayers. Number two, it looks like there's a lot of professionals here that are making a lot of money off homelessness. I'm sorry to say. I hope your intentions are good. There's professional homeless people here. Advocates that are getting paid. Listen, the number one thing is we've gotta think about our children. We just had a guy tell us that at least half these people are heroin addicts. And now you want to introduce them into the community, into neighborhoods, right next to schools. Come on people. God bless you. Pray and ask God to give you wisdom, okay? Cause we're all gonna answer for the way we take care of our children. They're the most helpless people in our community. Okay? And now you're gonna introduce heroin addicts into neighborhoods, residential neighborhoods. Come on. Do you have any common sense? God bless you. Okay. I believe that that concludes any member here who's interested in addressing the council. Okay, we have one more. Oh, I'm sorry. Okay, so we're still on the one minute time. If this is the one minute, this is the, I'll just remind folks, this is an opportunity for individuals to address the council who want to do so expedited. And you'll be given one minute. And then once that concludes, we'll go ahead and open it up to presentations and then to a public comment for two minutes. So we're still on the one minute if that's true. Thank you. Yeah, I'm Nancy. And I've been listening with such excitement to tonight's conversation. It feels inclusive of people who have been for so long considered outsiders who could not be part of our community. And I've been looking at and studying along with Brent and Stacey Falls as well. The sanctuary camp model for years now. And as the cities of Seattle said, the encampments have met and exceeded the contracted performance measures. Now that includes a whole lot because much is required of those camps. And one of the things that I want to point out that thrilled me most about them is the feeling among residents that they themselves become providers of help for themselves and other people. Thank you. Hello, my name is Linda Kover. I live at the tannery. I'll be brief. I really appreciate you're going forward with what you're doing. You've really covered a lot in a short while. However, I really need you to address the camp as it is right now. And one of the things I'm asking for is to define the camp by the levy with a fence. And there's an area with the bathrooms and the garbage can be placed if those tents were not there. And it's just a few tents that could be moved so that that walkway can be open. And I know you pushed it back some. It's absolutely not enough. And just define that with a fence and not a portable fence because that doesn't work at all. And one last thing is that the encampments you're talking about, they're out. Thank you. Please do feel free to if you want to leave your comment. Yeah, thank you. Okay. All right. Next speaker. Hi, my name is Luba Kaplan-Skya. I'm a fourth year student at UC Santa Cruz and I just wanted to offer possibly a solution to the safe parking. There's a competition every single year called Cruise Hacks and there was an app. I'm not affiliated with it at all. It's called Vroom, V-R-O-O-M. And it's sort of like an Airbnb for residents to rent out their parking spaces that are at their houses for really cheap rates, $3, $4 a night. It might seem not very appeasing for people but the founders of Airbnb also struggled to make the concept normal to allow strangers in your house. Perhaps we could also allow strangers to park in our parking lots and you post your driver's license and you basically get to help with this problem. And I'd also love to encourage our fellow community members to come up with ideas and solutions to this. I really appreciate City Council for all these proposed solutions. I've seen a lot today but I would love for us to come up, not only voice our concerns and opinions which are extremely valuable but also really creatively tap into our wonderful, incredible minds and think of solutions. Thank you. All right. So I think that concludes the interest of the, oh, I'm sorry, I keep, I apologize. I have a question for a few minutes. Yeah, and so- My name's Manuel Prado. I have you, I, yes, I have you. Yes, you'll have your four minutes. So we'll do presentations after we have the folks that just really briefly want to share their comments for one minute. Okay. I just want to applaud the council and the staff for this comprehensive approach and applaud you especially for the quickness by which you've been able to move. This is the first, we've been looking at homelessness for two decades, what have you. And this is the first re-initiating of a comprehensive address since we approved and built the shelters on River Street. Thank you very much. Go forward. Thank you. My name is Travis Coleman. I'm a teacher in Santa Cruz. Thank you very much for the time and energy and effort you have put into this. I strongly support and hope that you are successful in finding a new location where you can create a camp that can offer better support for our community. I also would just offer that as kind of a follow-up to the woman who spoke two people ago, I would gladly offer my driveway to someone who needed a safe place to stay overnight. And I suspect that many other homeowners in Santa Cruz would do the same. So if we can find a way to, exploit is not the right word, but to take advantage of that generosity in our communities, I think that we might be able to come up with other solutions as well to provide more people with safe places to stay. Okay. So I believe that concludes any interested member of the community who wanted to briefly address the council. At this time, I will now go ahead and acknowledge the folks that reached out to myself and our city clerk in advance requesting extra time on behalf of their organization and membership. So if Carol Walker could come forward on behalf of the Tannery and Coastal Watershed Council and Falker and Price Streets. Carol? Hi, you'll be given four minutes, Carol. No, I don't think I need it. Hi, Mayor Watkins, council members and all present. I'm Carol Walker. I speak tonight for River Neighbors and Coastal Watershed Council, which represents residents at the Tannery, Price, Falker and Grant Streets. Since the Ross encampment began and escalated beyond control, our residential neighborhoods have experienced undue and unwarranted harassment, threats to our lives, physical assaults, trespassing, loitering, car break-ins, vandalism, trash, drug paraphernalia and human waste, deposited on our properties, interference with auto traffic and endless convoy of heavy laden to push carts along the streets with persons stopping to dress and undress in public and depositing unwanted items on the sidewalks, a constant flow of pedestrian traffic all hours of the day and night that brings with it all of the above along with unbearable noise from outbursts of anger and frustrations, altercations, electronic equipment, all of which have taken a toll on our personal lives, emotional stamina, sense of community, financial costs to repair all of this and most importantly, the health and safety of us, our children and the San Lorenzo River habitat. Mayor Watkins, I implore you and your fellow council members to heed our pleas for help. We do need action now, not next week, not next council meeting now. I think we all realize that the Ross camp can't stay where it is, but while you're deciding how to proceed, we are stuck in an unacceptable situation. Until the camp is closed, we need protection for our neighborhoods that have been directly affected by the city, allowing this camp to escalate beyond reason or any level of tolerance. The three actions we are asking for now are a safe public river walk in an effort to help protect the river habitat and allow for clear and safe public access to the river walk that is currently being held hostage by this encampment. We ask that you move the boundary fence off of and away from the levy. Diagrams are in the packets that you received earlier this week. Protect river neighbors, provide 24 hour protection for Falker, Price and Grant Streets and the Tannery campus and all those who wish to return to the river walk. We desperately need safe neighborhoods as long as this camp remains. Camp community and management create a 24 hour camp management system with managers who will develop and enforce codes of conduct and rules in order to protect camp residents and the surrounding neighborhoods. The camp's current status as being unsanctioned yet allowed means no management which has led to the current out of control situation. Please know though that we are truly grateful and appreciative of the efforts made so far by the police department and the city for helping to maintain a level of safety for us but it's not enough as all of the above is still happening. Our heartfelt thanks and gratitude go to the downtown streets team who are picking up the trash left on our streets. It does not go unnoticed. You will likely hear from many individuals tonight who are included in this group who will express their own concerns. Please listen with compassion and understanding. I hope that you will feel compelled to act now. After 31 years on Falker Street, I now live in fear. I can't tell you how deeply this has affected me. Please don't do this to another neighborhood. Thank you. Before we get started, if I could ask you, please in the sunglasses to not speak during the, no, no, no, this is not the time for us. I'm gonna go ahead and ask you to please sit down and not be distracting and if you don't want to then we can go ahead and ask that you leave the chambers. You can go ahead and leave the chambers if you're not interested in not being quite there. Okay. This other guy do get in here. I don't know. Okay. You can go ahead. I'm just saying or not, I'm just saying or not. Okay. Mr. Ph.D. Okay. We have a chance, we will, okay. We'll go ahead and ask that you, excuse me. Excuse me. Please sit down and if not, I will ask you, you've been warned, next time there's an outburst, I will ask you to leave the chambers. Okay. And if you're interested in speaking after our presentations then you can have your minutes as others have in this chamber as well. Okay. So now we have the next presentation which is from Robert Norris representing Huff and you'll be given four minutes. Turn. One minute. On the door. Oh well. Two good. Okay. We can come back to him. So we'll go ahead and move forward then with Manuel Prado on behalf of the West Side Neighbors and you'll be given four minutes. All right. Well, thank you very much. Particularly the last woman that spoke. My heart goes out for her. To her, excuse me. No one deserves to live in fear like that. I wanna address a couple of points. The first is, yeah, we keep mentioning Seattle as a success story. Seattle spends a billion dollars a year on their homeless. They've got 11,000 people. So I don't know, that's what roughly $90,000 per. I don't know if we have that tax base. Now, if you take it a step further and you sort of look, you say, all right, well, have they had any success? The property crime rate in Seattle is two and a half times that of Los Angeles. Four and a half times that of New York. To me, that does not sound like a model that we would wanna follow. Now, if you follow the research, recently 63% of those people in Seattle refused lodging. The primary reason was because there are too many rules. Another perspective here is that 40 to 50% of the people in San Francisco and Vancouver that are homeless claim they're there because of the generous offerings they have for homeless people. So most of all, I just wanna really make clear here that what we're trying to do through compassion here is actually the cruelest measure we could possibly take. Anyone here that has ever dealt with some of the addiction problem knows that what we're talking about here is actually considered enabling. We're making the problem worse. The problem is there from a drug addiction problem as well as mental health. We heard Dr. Leff say that over 50% were injecting drugs. 39% of these people have mental health problems. They need help. We need to provide them professional assistance. We don't need to provide them a way to perpetuate this lifestyle. It's not helping them in any way. Could I please have quiet back there? Yes. Thank you. So the other point that I just wanna make is the reason I'm here today is I'm a father. And the reason more people in my position aren't here today is because they're putting those kids to bed right now and they're taking care of them. They're looking out for the safety of those children. I'm fortunate enough that I could find somebody in my life that can fill in for me while I come to take care of this matter that really, really matters to myself and the rest of my community. My kids don't get to vote. No kids around here get to vote. But what we're talking about is a measure that is going to remove the safe places for them to play. Lastly, I'd just like to ask that we all respect the democracy that we're so lucky to have here. I'm sure everybody abhors what's going on at a federal level. But let's look at what's going on right here. What we're talking about, this state of emergency, it's ridiculous. I ask you to please go by the same measures that everybody else has to go by here. Let's vote on these things. Let's have hearings, let's research it. Thank you for your time. So we'll go back to the next presentation, which is Robert Norris, representing Huff. Members of the community and the city council. What's going on here is actually all about closing the Ross camp. It's not really about providing and dealing with the issues at the Ross camp, which could be dealt with tonight by establishing an emergency camp ground somewhere else for the overflow that's in the Ross camp, which is admittedly, it's overly crowded. It's got its problems. But that's not the interest of either the staff or the council, at least certainly a significant portion of it. Urgency procedures need to be passed tonight that allow accessible rather than theoretical alternatives for survival camp grounds, safe parking areas, shelters, and of course housing. I remember the toxic veto, the progressive majority gave to rent control in January and the Matthews minority. I remember the rent task farce passed earlier, which doesn't even begin to look at the real issues of landlord profit, rent raises, citizen flight, and cost of living, which are the real issues around these things. Having no substance to any real move to sustain what housing exists, we need to recognize the likelihood of growing homelessness and the simple undeniable reality of people sleeping on the sidewalks in the parks and wherever they must. In a Sunday Sentinel article, Mayor Watkins has shown here determination to meet this dispersal and deportation guidelines of March 15th when the council repudiated, which they reputed by a majority last meeting. Now, of course, we have the new April guideline, which is of course unilaterally proposed by the real brains and energy behind this. And I'm afraid the brains don't really amount to a real commitment to the welfare of the majority of homeless people in this community, Suzy O'Hara and Sheena Tull, sorry, Tina Schull. Sorry about that. I can understand why that's happening, but I have to point it out, not without any personal animus toward these two, but because what they are saying is a mythology, that housing exists, that these proposed solutions are actually gonna provide enough, even for the Ross camp, to say nothing of the rest of Santa Cruz. Now, last Wednesday, Attorney Anthony Prince of the California Homeless Union began training the homeless community on how to implement the federal Martin versus Boise decision. How can we, those of us who are homeless and those who are housed and interested, stand up to the city's run-em-out-of-town juggernaut? City Manager Martin Bernal's P&R panhandling team has repeatedly presented a false narrative of accessible alternatives, but these missing shelter survival camps or housing alternatives don't exist. Their hopes, their theories, they just aren't there and they haven't been there. We've seen time and time again, these promises have evaporated when the deadline showed up. The attorney's legal workshop discussed how local poor people outside can respond, what tactics can be used when threatened with destruction of their tents and given directions to move along to nowhere. How can a homeless woman cited for blocking the sidewalk, being in a park after dark, or being in a closed area respond? Now, more than ever, community members need to be on the alert for clusters of police cars harassing a lone individual, which is happening with some regularity. Video documentation is important. Personal presence can be helpful. Organizations like Huff, which I represent, Conscience in Action and Food Not Bombs are good points of contact. Donation should be going to unhoused folks directly, not to secondary non-profits whose administrative costs and membership restrictions act as barriers. The key weapon is the injunction. That's a court order. If you're interested in this, contact Huff at four, two, three, Huff, H-U-F-F. Thank you. Thank you. All right, we have Phil Posner from Conscience in Action. First of all, I too wanna thank the mayor for allowing me to speak and the staff, the tremendous amount of work that you did put into your suggestions. I was gonna respond, mayor, to your article as did Robert a second ago. But I'm so devastated by the reality of the difficulty of this situation. I'm not gonna talk about what I thought I was gonna talk about. I really wanna talk about empathy. I'm only telling you that because it happens that my doctorate is an empathy. The specific thesis is how does empathy influence ethical behavior? And you cannot talk about empathy without talking about human suffering what that lady is going through. But what also Robert refers to is the suffering of homeless people who have no roof over their head. My heart goes out to you. But my heart also goes out as does all of our hearts to the people who have no roof over their head who have to sleep on the street, who have to pee someplace because there's no other place to do it. I think the problems are incredibly difficult. But Maxine, you scared me with your article as Robert suggested too by suggesting that we're gonna close the camp down. Where do you think those people are going to go? Are they just gonna go to someone's driveway which was a beautiful nice suggestion? Are they going to go to other places in our city that are gonna cost us more money? I hate to say it. I too find the camp unsavory, et cetera. But I don't think you have an alternative yet to move anybody from that camp until you have places for people to go to. But when you do, absolutely do it. But in the meantime, think about human suffering because Mayor, in your article, I got the feeling that you'd really, I don't wanna say, it's not fair. I gotta believe you know what human suffering is. What it means not to have a roof over your head. All I can do is please for all of us to show empathy for each other for the suffering that so many people have to endure and do the best that we can. Thank you. Is there Greg Benson here? Representing, I don't know if that's... Greg Benson? Okay, okay. So then our last presentation will be from Abby Samuels representing the freedom sleepers. Hi, I'm Abby. I'm here to talk about truth, not alternative facts, which seem to be presented in the last meeting. Also, I wanna thank Bonnie and Lee for looking for a place. I really appreciate that. Average, I wanna talk about, whoops, there we go. Oh, this is my old presentation. Shoot. The average age of, this is all wrong. Can I stop it and get the right presentation? Sir. Okay. So the average age is 50 years old, but they died, but the new one I have is more current. It's 47 years versus 77. The people that have died, 50 years old, 57, 68, which is beyond the 50 years old. At 55 people have died. We don't hear, most of these deaths are unreported. Now all of a sudden they're getting reported in the media. I wanna talk about health and safety. If you cared, you wouldn't be kicking people out from the rain from the doorways. You wouldn't be reporting deaths. You would be reporting the deaths of every single person who died. You wouldn't allow people who are homeless, people that are disabled to be homeless. You wouldn't allow seniors to be homeless. You wouldn't kick people out of the street after they just got out of the hospital, which actually will be illegal July 1st, 2019. Dr. Lef did not say to close the camp. He said to eventually close the camp. He never said it needed to be closed. He did talk though about harm reduction. By the way, there's rats all over West Cliff and the post office, are you gonna close West Cliff? They're all over Santa Cruz. I wanna talk about point in time census that was done by the fire chief. We counted 210 each tent having one to four people. The fire chief says 60 to 70% are occupied during the evening. So I did a 208 tents divided by 60% comes out to 145.6, but we estimate that there's at least 200 people sleeping there every night, probably closer to 280. I hope that you get enough, before you move them out, have enough shelter for 200, not for 100, based on a not a true fact. Let's talk about the strict rules in Seattle. It was mentioned in the last presentation that they have zero tolerance for drugs and alcohol use possessions and violence. It's true for violence and possession of arms. It is not true that they have very strict rules. They did a survey, which it looks like we're about to do a survey. So that was good in order to decide what to do in Seattle. I just looked on the web and I can find many low barrier shelters, which means people that use are allowed into the shelter. So there's a campus housing alliance, 100 low barrier beds, queen and shelter, which is supposed to open up soon, and that means drug and alcohol are not banned. As you say, you're looking for a different transitional place for the people at Camp Ross, you have to look for low barrier. The navigation center, that's from their website, drugs and alcohol are discouraged, but they don't just allow it. In fact, they have harm reduction approaches and they have minimum rules. So that means they allow drugs. I spoke to two different people, Bradford Gerber of the Low-Income Housing Institute in tiny homes, and as well as Nick Jones, who's a legislative assistant with council member Sawant from Seattle. And that's what someone else will talk about that. Thank you. So now, we have, if I could get a sense of how many folks here are interested in addressing the council, you'll be given two minutes. Okay, so please line up to my left and you'll have up to two minutes to speak. Good evening, Madam Mayor. I'm not gonna talk long. I'm the representative for the encampment. I understand how people feel. I feel the same way they do. Sometimes it gets rough, but everybody over there is not bad. So look in the mirror next time you wanna point fingers with people first. It's easy to solve. Come talk to us. We'll give you the manpower to create places for us to go. You just find the places that's away from people. We don't wanna be there anymore than you want us there. You know, people drive by and throw shit, excuse my language, but you know, that's immature people that I don't deal with in real life. I'm dealing, supposedly dealing with mature adults who have ideas of things for their future and for their children. All you have to do is come and talk to us and you can end this. Get ideas from the people that you're trying to move around on how to move them around. You have no problem. Oh, your time. Your time. Federal law though. We're not going anywhere. So don't print. Your time is up. Go ahead. No. Hi. Hello everyone. My name's Alicia Kool. I help put together the Ross camp council, what you know as the camp council. The camp council has expressed to me numerous times that they would like a encampment that respects their privacy and their dignity. It's not that they're requesting a spot that has no rules at all. The thing is that they want a spot that's low barrier, a place that treats them like residents, something that's perhaps not short term. I spoke in length with Lisa, who is the chair of Dignity Village in Oregon. She says that the key to their success has been a low barrier model. It's not that they straight allow drugs type of thing, but what they do is they have a no illegal substances outside of your tent policy or outside of your spot. So if they see somebody who's intoxicated, they send them home, just like you would do in another situation. They don't say mandatory alcohol and drug testing or program to live there. That's the concern that I have with the model being proposed is like you heard the doctor say, 50% of the people at the Ross camp have that problem. We all know that people are not going to go into a drug program unless they're ready to. So forcing them to do that as part of a housing requirement is not going to be successful. What it's going to do is disband the Ross camp and put all those people who can't go into this other encampment back on the streets. What's going to happen as well is you're going to lose the solidarity that we have with the Ross camp and the council that I've helped establish there. If we don't move them to a low barrier option, which they want to go to, my work will have been, it's done. Like they're all going to disband. I have no more council. We have no more way to communicate with you. These are important issues. We can just assume that everybody at the Ross camp can go into a high barrier encampment. Sorry, you already went. Nope. Yep. Okay. Our next speaker. No. The jury Mandarin is going to happen again. Okay. Go ahead. Your turn. Hello. My name is Mike Dealey. So ladies, gentlemen, non-gendered and transgender people, it is no secret that as a nation, we spend far too much on our military budget. A couple of days ago, President Trump asked to increase the military budget to $750 billion. There's been a lot of fear mongering in our nation on the macro scale and the micro scale, thinking we need authority to create a safe environment. I'm asking you today to consider what Dwight D Eisenhower said. Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children. This is not a way of life at all in any true sense. Under the clouds of war, it is humanity hanging on a cross, unquote. And in this city, as a city staff mentioned earlier, we must consider long-term fiscal solutions. How many people in this room know that our military budget, our police budget, is $30 million a year? Give me half of that, give me 15 million, and we won't have homelessness to steal. We won't have a drug addiction because these are problems of despair, and these are economic refugees to our system that is at a peak in economic inequality in century. So let us consider, when we spend 30 million a year on our police force alone, is that really making us safer? What if we had 15 million of that to do other things over a period of 10 years? That's $150 million. With amazing people in this town, all the terrific organizers, volunteers, social service experts, could it be possible to eradicate homelessness? Thank you. You're welcome. Thank you. Okay. Hey, how are y'all doing? I've met one or two of you before, but most of you know. I, you don't need to know my name. I'm an outsider to Santa Cruz, I just got here. And I just thought I'd poke my head in because this stuff actually does concern me. I do sleep outside. I'm not really, really, really struggling like some of the desperate people you guys are supposed to be dealing with. But it's not easy out there, especially when you're always looking for who around you is not trustworthy. I just wanna congratulate you all because it just seems like you guys are just really frugal. And I know that that's a great thing to be, especially with rising income inequality and the fact that the environment is kind of being devastated on a daily basis and environmental resources are drying up by the, I don't really know a number for that. You guys, potentially some of you might end up in one of these one day, which is really cool that you're able to stand that because to me, it kinda looks like farewell to Manzanar. You've got the walls in the back and it looks like even barbed wire in the very back. I don't know if I could live under those conditions. Maybe you can, which maybe that makes you a better person than me. However, I would say that in case you or someone you know or your kids or the kids of Santa Cruz County end up having to live in one of these for any length of time, you might make it a little more human because I don't think I would stay in there if I had any other choice. So in case people are desperate, you might get some, but otherwise I might have to try somewhere else. I'm here, Phillip. I mean, it's probably gonna be a repeat of the last time I was here. We were here two weeks ago with the same thing and then we, no emergency, right? But now we got an emergency. I still don't kinda get it. Camp Ross is the only real health emergency. If you close it, then there's no emergency. So declaring an emergency can only be because you want to have authority to have little camps all over town. And money can be had, it must be spent and declaring a shelter emergency does that. Let's not fool ourselves. There's no definition of emergency shelter crisis or what goal is acceptable. You're just saying that it is. That's on you, but the taxpayers, the renters, the businesses that pay the bills have actual property rights, should have a bit more say than those who contribute near nothing except their problems and have no property rights except those that you are willing to give away. Historically, California only shelters 25% of the homeless and that way a long time. So to declare the status quo in emergency is it's a kind of joke, you know? Anyway, California's behind the nation in this but also has two times the national problem. We have 11.6 times the national problem but still has 20%, a vastly higher percentage of our share of the national problem for our size. We're doing plenty for our share of the state's homeless. Maybe too much. It's possible we're attracting homeless. I see no admission that something is wrong with Santa Cruz to have so many more homeless than mostly everywhere else. There are pockets of extreme homeless here and there but we're right at the top of the list. I see no plan to change that. All I see is a shelter, shelter, shelter in perpetuity. And we should, I also see that there's NGOs lining up to get a piece of the money available. I may have a solution for you for a transitional encampment. Actually, I'm becoming kind of a fan of them. I've read all of Brad's material and looked at a lot of things online but there's actually a property on DuBois Street. 105 between the next 111 vacant lot, one acre fenced, one ingress, Hegress, Harvey West, close to the Coral Street Shelter and an area not unknown to a lot of homeless folks. It's been vacant since about three years and here's the interesting part that can be, it's currently being leased for 5,000 a month by Metro and their lease expires at the end of this year. For three years, I mean, for who knows how long this could have been used as a potential, really a pretty good, I think a very ideal location for both safe parking as well as, you know, a pilot transitional encampment. Again, in an industrial area, close to the services that homeless use. Something to think about. Thank you. I just wanna say that there's a lot of feelings flowing around this room. You guys have important decisions to make. This is a controversy issue. You know, we have heard from people both sides of the spectrum. I heard, you know, the wars, they're powerful and then I think they're more powerful when they get repeated by a council member. I asked, hoping that the city council made the best decision, was best for this community and then let's don't let the feelings get on the way and let's have a clear mind, clear thinking and let's come up with the best decision, you know, best choice for everybody and if tonight is not the best time to decide, you know, maybe hold it on and hold it for tomorrow and then your minds are clear, the feelings move out of the way and then come up with a best decision. Thank you. Thank you, council, for doing this very hard work. Susie, you're like Wonder Woman. I love you. My kids found needles in Harvey West Park over 10 years ago. This has been an issue for decades. First, I would say expand funding for our existing rehab facilities like Janice and Alto. I'm sure there are more, but I don't know about them. I would aim for, with the pilot program, doing both a low barrier facility as well as a zero tolerance facility so that you can separate the two groups into people who want help with their addictions and then people who just want help housing their children. And I haven't heard much about any long term low income housing. I think some of that $10 million could be earmarked to purchase land that then could be built upon if you guys work with the county and the different regulations. I'd like to see more structures like the one that just is going up on Water Street, the one down on Cathcart and Pacific. These are all five to six story buildings that are housing many, many people. I think some of them are not affordable, but if we could aim for something of that size and get the residents of the city to just stop complaining, we are growing. We are a city, we're not a town anymore, and we need to admit that and move with the times and provide housing for people. And as far as getting the homeless people involved in their own community improvement, if they're gonna be using these pilot programs, get them involved along the lines of Habitat for Humanity where they do sweat equity to be there the 10 hours a week volunteering, good ideas. Thank you, thank you. Elise Kazby, local activist. I started out as a young professional in the mental health field. I was in one of the most forward states in the Union, Massachusetts before the Reagan cuts. I'm saying this because I have been investigating homelessness. I've taken sociology courses, I have a BA. I've studied a lot of things that pertain to social activism and so forth. And I would say I've been in shelters here. I'm not ready to speak about that. I'm not ready to speak about my journey right now, but I will say that please don't insult homeless people by thinking that in three or four months, the most well-intentioned, intelligent investigations which only amount to an hour here or there per week are going to really help you to understand the challenge of homelessness. And I just wanna start with the fact that most of the people sitting on this council I would classify as neoliberals. Under neoliberalism, we have had a complete lack of housing that has been willfully and deliberately not solved. In Santa Cruz, we don't even talk about low income housing because we can barely address so-called affordable housing. Let alone actual just housing for well-to-do rich people. Okay, so as somebody who experienced homelessness because of domestic violence and because also at a certain point the agencies were just so poor and I was harmed by mental health providers, I wouldn't trust any of you. I'm sorry, except maybe Drew and maybe Sandy and Cruz a little bit because they are progressives who are not liberals. So I just wanna say we need in-depth research. Suzy, thank you. Thank you, Tina. It's a good start, long way to go, evidence-based and we're just getting started. Thank you. I too am also a member of this community of Santa Cruz and I do care about this community that I live in. Dealing with syringes and needles and where I go at locations, I've picked them up all around in the mountains, at the beaches, on the west, on the east. Doesn't matter what location about where the needles, I'm picking them up on my time. Not your time, but voluntarily my time. That's how much I care about your kids and your lives as well as you guys deal with mine. By the invasion of privacy and having a home, I too am also houseless. I have children here. I've raised those children. And as a father, I do care and also putting out the music that I play out in the public just to see fathers and their kids what I used to do. It's very hard and difficult for me to be happy as well. Just as you elders along, I've been gaining the knowledge and input by each and every one of you individuals. But what's been taken away is that heart broken love with children, the ones that I've had, the ones that I've helped create, just as you as yourselves and myself as well, living a life. If we still have a heart, it's still ticking. We're not dogs, we're not animals, we're human beings. How can we do that? By being picked on or by being invaded of our privacy. Please help us out. Stop pushing us in a location where you want us as cattle. 1220, that's a prison. I've tried to before. I got kicked out the second week, volunteering with downtown street teams in the alley. That's where it led me, going back into the battlefield here in Santa Cruz, leading elders who are older than each and every one of you individuals cleaning up our community. I was at home and I was listening to a lot about Seattle and how you're modeling some things after Seattle and their successes. There's an article that another gentleman actually referenced some of the data in this article. It's an autumn 2018, very comprehensive article in a national urban magazine called City Journal. They cite something very different from what you guys are citing about Seattle. They've had a huge increase in homelessness, crime and addiction and that has exploded in the last five years. And like the gentleman said, they spend a billion dollars a year in homelessness efforts. They cite, and I'm just gonna cite some excerpts from it. So they cite three myths. One is that many homeless are holding down jobs when in fact only 7.5% report working full time. The second myth is that homeless are native to Seattle when in fact more than half are from outside the city limits. The third myth is that homeless want help but there aren't enough services when in fact 63% of street homeless refuse shelter. The article states that the city's compassion campaign has evolved into permissiveness, enablement, crime and disorder. Citing an array of horrors including theft, drugs, fighting, rape, murder, explosions, prostitution, needles and feces. Yet prosecutors have dropped thousands of misdemeanor cases and police are directed not to arrest people for homelessness related offenses including theft, destruction of property and drug crimes all of which we see lots of here. It also states that compassion without limits is a road to disaster. Cities must stop seeding their parks, schools and sidewalks to homeless encampments. Data from Houston shows local leaders have reduced homelessness by 60% by providing service and enforcing a zero tolerance policy for street camping, panhandling and trespassing and property crimes. Who stands to gain? The big winners are the social services. They're the ones who stand to gain from homeless. Thank you, thank you. Okay. And is there any other members here who are interested in addressing the council that haven't already spoken? Okay. Hi, OS Y Salinas resident, President Salinas Munner County Homeless Union. So I'm about 40 miles south of you. I'm just really pleased and impressed that this is even an agenda item. And I appreciate that. The last three council meetings have been very invigorating. So thank you for at least forwarding the conversation that I've not seen in this whole region. I do have some disappointments, I guess. You know, this, if you close out the Ross camp, there's got to be a lot of people in this camp. There's got to be a place for people to be. We have Martin Rivers Boise, which means that anywhere on public space, you already can't do anything about it. So you need to open up more space than just this 40. It's a good start, it's a very good start, but we're going to need, what do we do with the rest of the 95% of people who aren't going to be able to access that? You can get arrested for leaving your dog outside, but it's okay to strip people of all their bedding and let them sleep out in the cold all night. And that's legal. That's not right. So I hope that you're doing something better than this. I'd like to see a majority say yes on this sanctuary camp, please. You know, it needs to happen. And you just need to just grow up. You know, the maturity factor of this naysay node camp because it's not perfect. People aren't perfect. Nobody's going to fit a mold. And you know, we just have to diversify, I suppose, and realize that people are different. You can't just put them in a box. You know, I mean, you got all this open space. If you want to do it better, you know, people in trash organize space and people could set up an encampment, you just need to be able to pass people over so that in that way they can have some consistency in their life or routine, be able to be somewhere. If they can't be there, we'll then open up more space where they can be plenty of space throughout the city. And if not that, then it's back to the sidewalks back in downtown, the Elkhofs. It's going to be somewhere. I didn't really prepare to say anything, so thanks for letting me have a moment. I just wanted to say that while exploring solutions, we need to acknowledge that these humans are part of our community, whether they're drug abusers or not. I have encountered quite a few comments on Nextdoor and here tonight as well that suggest otherwise. So I hope that people will be open-minded to that. And I would also like to say that the vulnerable members of our community extend beyond children to those who suffer from mental illness, physical insecurity, disability, trauma, abuse, and many other reasons. I believe it's naive to think that just because one is grown that they are capable of caring for themselves and we need to expand beyond that mindset to find a feasible solution long-term. Thank you. Hello, my name is Travis and I've been homeless in Santa Cruz County for about 17 years now. Also part of the Food Not Bombs program for the last five to six years. I'm a sober individual. I do not do drugs or alcohol. And I'm also worried about the dirty needle problem myself. I was wondering if there would be any type of way we could set up a volunteer program of giving out containers so people could collect these dirty needles and return them not for any type of benefit, but for the benefit of the community that we're living in. Because I've definitely been finding a lot of more needles that we've been seeing for the last two to three years that I've been here. And I'm an independent homeless person. I don't approve of camps and walled spaces and working communities where people don't know how to feed themselves and don't know where to shop. But I do definitely agree on people having more faith in the long-term people that have tried to be better people in this community and are trying to protect the families of this community and be part of the community rather than destroying the community. We need some superheroes to start taking care of these bad boys from a bad boy lane. And I don't know who that's gonna be yet, but it can't just be the security guards and the police and those people. Thank you. Thanks. Thank you. Okay. Good evening, Mayor and City Council. Well, you made a good start. I'm happy to see that you actually are thinking about homelessness for over 30 seconds. It's given me some hope for a minute here. And I just really wish that you get a sanctuary camp tonight for the overflow at Ross to complete all of the people over there. Start feeding at Coral Street immediately, get some stuff from Costco or whatever, get food to the people. I see people digging out of the trash every day. I walk around with oranges in my sack every day to give people, give people sacks of bread or whatever. And it's really upsetting. I'd like to also bring some things to Civic and be a good place to put people. You can rent half the places downtown or empty. You could, all those commercial buildings, you could put 50 people there, 40 people there, 30 people there and fill up all those empty places. There's a lot of places we can put people. How about the university? How about the farm over there in the village? Why don't they offer a place to put the camp, the camp that we don't want or whatever? I like the woman's idea of separating the camps of people that just want to be alone and with their children and people that want to run them up. They could be in separate camps and at the university, they could say, oh, we're gonna surround them, they're gonna be self-policed, whatever, but it starts to think about other than, these are seven places the city owns. Well, how about the university? How about the depot over there that you took 130 people that were in the homeless garden project and told them they had to get out because you were buying the depot and moving it back and now it's empty for how many years? Has it been empty? Why can't you fill it with homeless people? Why can't you think of other solutions? Why can't you think of the Betz Hall? Why can't you think of other solutions? Please, I'm begging you. Good evening, I'm Scott Graham. There's a lot of people out there that think that if we do something with a Ross camp that that'll solve the homeless issue. Well, that's just the tip of the iceberg. There's another 800 to maybe 2,000 people camped out all over town and all over the county that this little bit you're gonna do for the people of the Ross camp aren't even being affected by it. So it's a major issue. So I would recommend you declare a crisis. This is a crisis. There's thousands of people. There's not just the Ross camp. And as far as the concern people have with needles, why not put a deposit on them where people can collect them and turn them in for five cents or 10 cents or something? You see these homeless people all over town carrying these giant bags full of cans. There'd be a lot of people who would go out and look for needles and they'd clean the needles out of everywhere that where people are throwing them now and we can get rid of the needles that way. And then also I thought the county was a partner in this. So why aren't the county parking lots included in this study? The biggest parking lots in the city limits are not part of this study. Let's call on the county to say, hey, you'll put a little skin in the game. Thank you. And I believe that you'll be our last speaker. Hello, everybody. My name is Isaac Morris. I support what the people were trying to do because I think it's, now this condition, I've been in San Cruz for 13 years and I've seen what the rent is going up. I've seen this condition get worse and worse and the problem has never really been solved and dealt with. And I really think it's really need to show love and compassion to people because at the end of the day, we're just human beings. Everybody is entitled to affordable housing and shelter and it shouldn't be this and that. We need to really practice that and have compassion because as a youth myself, I think it's important that we do be aware of these conditions. They do affect families. They do affect mothers and all that. And we need to have a place for people to sleep because if not, they don't get after asleep. They're not able to function carefully. They're not able to make right decisions. They're not able to get back to the community. So it's important to look at these issues but also look at it effective way, how we can make this issue and people that are involved, especially in the community that it works together when it's not a pick or this and that that we all get together and starts off in a solution. Because if not, if you look at 10 years from now, Santa Cruz might turn into Carmel or might turn into another place and it's gonna keep getting worse. We can't, we could put money into it but we have to solve the solution. Because anybody can put money into something but if you don't solve the solution, it's the same thing repeating itself again. And I don't think people want to do with that. They want a solution so people can have, just be human beings. Thank you. Don't see any other folks interested in addressing the council so we'll go ahead and close public comment at this time. I'll go ahead and return back to the council for action and deliberation but I will give us maybe about four minutes or so just to take a quick stretch break, run to the restroom and then we'll return back. Council members, so we're good to go at this point. So we'll go ahead and return back now to council deliberation and action. There's a lot of items before us. I'll go ahead and open it up to see if any council member wants to kick it up by some air coming. Sure. I should have, I had a question for Lee. So I think it was you and I actually now, yeah, I think you're the appropriate person to address with this. But I know that it was mentioned at one point during the presentation that the beds at the Salvation Army are not full and that was at some point, was that Susie? Okay. It was mentioned that the beds at the Salvation Army haven't been, aren't completely full and I was just wondering what are some of the barriers that people are addressing or attributing to not wanting to go there? Yeah, so the VFW is actually full. The program that's not full is the Laurel Street program. And it's, you know, what we have found with our engagement with the Gateway encampment what is that, I would say the majority of the women that we have talked with, their kind of comments back to us are predominantly not around concerns as to proximity to other sleepers and things that we would typically think about in terms of barriers with that kind of shelter model. It's what we're mostly hearing is that they have other plans. They're going back to their home communities. They have other housing plans in mind and they're just not interested in engaging. Okay, so now's the time for the council to have action and deliberation. We've heard from the community, so please allow this process to take place without interruption. Are you, are we asking, are you done? I'm also prepared to make a motion at any point. Well, I had a couple of questions and then we'll go ahead and then I'll return to you. One of which was asked. I was just curious also, Suzy or Tina, do you have any idea how many people are using the services over at HSC in terms of showers and other things in combination with being a resident in the camp? So I'm just curious if services there are being accessed or not? Just if you have a sense of that. I don't have a sense of that specifically if people at the Gateway encampment are crossing over and obtaining the hygiene services there, I don't have that data. Okay. And then you mentioned the armory was still under discussion. Do we have any idea how long that's going to take? Is that something the county's moving quickly on or do we have any ideas on that? Yeah, the county is engaging very actively with Assembly Member Stone's office who has taken this up and I know that there are conversations happening with the Department of the Military. We are still trying to suss out some questions of renovation and schedules and also talking to them about the fees. You might, I think we mentioned this a couple of weeks ago that the statewide fee schedule, they charge $880 a day. And that is what we did pay when for 20 years that site hosted the Winter Shelter and we were looking for some relief on that. So that's the two threads of the conversation but we don't have anything definitive as of now. But we are, I mean there is a lot of urgency and work going on about it. So I know we keep saying we keep hoping to hear but we do hope we have some imminent answers within a week or two. And then lastly, I guess I'd just like to make a request that working through the two by two, if it's possible we could also look at county locations. That I think we should try to build that partnership that way as well. Thank you. Questions? Yeah. Oh, he's so, Vice Mayor, coming. I had a couple other questions too. I just wanted to start also by thanking you all for the hard work that you've done to bring us all this information. It was a really very well done study on all these sites and with a limited amount of time. And so I just wanna say thank you for all the work that you did around this, all staff. Thank you very much. And I had a question, Council Member Glover brought up a couple sites, including the Santa Cruz Bible Church, Our Lady Star of the Sea Catholic Church. And I was just wondering if any of those, because he identified that they had some space potentially available. I was just wondering if any of those people or if any of those institutions had reached out to the city in terms of being operators when some of the bids went out for safe parking programs. No. And I was also curious if some of the other institutions that did reach out about safe parking programs, whether or not they'd asked to have 10, 20, 50, what was kind of the range and numbers of cars that they were willing to and able to support. So the program that is funded through the LOI process, so that's the emergency shelter LOI process. It's part of the heap and cash kind of portfolio funding that we're getting from the county. The one successful applicant was the Association of Faith Communities. And their program that they are being funded for is a satellite program where it's kind of spread around the community on a small scale. So you're getting, say, up to 50 or 60 spaces, but at a dozen or more locations. And it's really the intentionality around that is to kind of get to what we had talked about earlier, having it small scale and somewhat manageable at each individual site. And the reason why I believe, and I can't speak for them directly, but what my understanding is, keeping that small scale allows for the individual churches that are participating to help manage the programs when you get to a much greater scale, which they've also considered at a parcel in Mid County, that the staffing requirements, the security requirements grow and scale. And so what they elected to really consider as kind of their first, say, foray into this program is thinking about more of that small scale satellite program that actually quite mimics their indoor shelter model as well. Can I just briefly add something before, and I'll go back to it. I just want to also bring to your awareness that the Star of the Sea Church is a alternative school site. So there are students there on an everyday basis. I know in the presentation it mentioned that Galt is also surrounding there is an alternative school that is actually functioned out of the Star of the Sea Church, just sort of as an FYI. Rita, I had another question on that topic. If that'd be on this safe parking program. We do have already in our ordinance the ability for individual churches to host three or so individuals in their cars in safe parking. Do you have any idea how many churches are doing that? I don't believe there's currently a kind of a sanction program with churches. I believe that this association of faith community program is the first kind of program that's trying to bring together those efforts in a coordinated way. Right now individual churches could, but not part of a program. Right, and I do believe that our existing code does allow for churches to host vehicles on their property. But we don't have a handle on how many are doing it, but it sounds to me as though the association of faith communities anticipates reaching out to interested churches and actually developing that as a program. Is that, they're actually ready to launch or imminently launching. So they actually already have the host of churches that have signed up. They've gone through a, quite frankly, perhaps multi-year, at least multi-month process to engage with our local churches. I know there's been varying levels of interest in participating, but they have been successful in bringing in a number of churches to support the program. And so really the question that they had for the city and the county is whether we would consider providing a lot as well. And if I could just pursue the questioning. Just with safe parking, I think the individuals are across such a spectrum. I am the working poor living in my camper or someone transient dealing drugs, et cetera, being the kind of problems that we hear about. And so could you describe the intake program to the extent you know it for that safe parking program? Sure. And what I will reflect on is what I've heard from the association of faith communities in terms of how they characterize the demographic that they're serving. So this is a fairly high barrier program in that folks that are in the program really do need to have, be able to adhere to the rules of each individual church that hosts and be pretty self-sufficient. And so much like their satellite program within the church facilities, this demographic of folks are folks that are able to adhere to rules and behavioral norms. And the way they characterize it is it's a pretty self-selecting group. I do understand from the perspective of intake that there is going to be a strong alliance with the county office of education as to identifying families with children for this program. I don't know at what numbers, but I know that there's intentionality of really trying to focus on families with children with this program. Thank you. Okay, okay. Council Member Glover and then Vice Mayor, come up. Great. I didn't think so. I'm sorry, I thought you had it. I did. Okay. Thank you, Mayor. Susie, just from your experience and the research that you've done and just as an estimation, because I appreciate bullet number two, urgently develop and improve a small scale pilot program for either of the suggested encampment structures either safe sleeping or the transitional encampments. What in your mind does urgently pertain to because we want to, as you mentioned, and I totally respect in that analysis of wanting to be intentional in the implementation of it since we've been able to move so quickly over the last three meetings to get to this point, which was my goal. Now we can really start talking about the best ways to implement it. So what do you think about that? And then also the feasibility of establishing as one council member, was a community member mentioned, setting up two different styles of the camp, one low barrier and one sanctuary style closer to what Brent suggested in his proposal. So with regard to urgent, I think the qualifying factor would be identifying a site by next week. Quite frankly, I think we have to have a site that we are ready to move forward with. And so having a conversation around some of the sites that we've identified, the sites that you've identified really narrowing in on the intentionality around that so we can return with the utmost urgency, I would say, if we can fit it in next week, that would make sense and move forward with a site. I also do believe that it would be beneficial this week, perhaps tomorrow or the next day to put out a call for interest for hosting at a non-profit and or a faith-based site. While we did this evaluation really thinking about site control and city-owned properties, it does make sense to at least query our community about whether there's interest in hosting a site. I mean, as I mentioned, with the city of Seattle, that faith-based community really did shepherd that process. So in terms of urgency, I think if we had a site available, we could stand up a program within the timeframe that we're talking about. Second question, I'm sorry, I forgot. The feasibility of establishing the community member's suggestion of creating two separate barrier camps to be able to segregate the population and identify which ones are interested in immediate transition into a transitional encampment with the higher rule requirements as opposed to people that are just interested in going for a place to sleep but not having such high barriers as far as rules to be able to identify the different populations. Yeah, so in terms of feasibility, it's all about citing an operator capacity and as we add on to kind of this small-scale approach, new sites require an additional conversation about where those should be and then really engaging with our operator and nonprofit partners to understand their capacity to meet those needs. I will say, functionally separating out those populations appears to make sense. It will be very challenging citing in a transitional encampment that allows drug and alcohol use. I think just from the perspective of trying to make this happen and already dealing with a very difficult conversation about even one that requires these kind of norms and behavioral norms to adhere to. I will mention in my research, there are a number of cities who kind of dabbled with the idea of co-mingling or even hosting what I would refer to as kind of wet shelter and have not seen much success with that. It does manifest in the issues that come along with drug use and alcohol use with regard to really taxing the neighborhood and also contributing to illicit and illegal behavior. Just one more question. And then Council Member Brown. Thank you. So we heard from the community and wanting there to be the process of communication and public input with regards to the ordinances and the structures around there with the timeline that's proposed with April 17th as well as the urgent development of the small-scale pilot programs, what would your recommendation be with regards to addressing the issue of adopting and or conducting community input around the ordinance languages? I think it would be beneficial for the Council to consider that transitional encampment process, project charter and thinking about really the tail end of that process after you have engaged with the community, built kind of this buy-in and community acceptance and then also should the Council move in this direction have real live data to support success of a transitional encampment or another alternative shelter model? It's at that time to really think about how best to and I don't have the wording in front of me really look at those widespread policy changes that can reduce the barriers for innovation and actually think about how we can capitalize on the success of the pilot and think about it in a larger context. So I would suggest at the tail end of this project charter process that we would have that conversation about the ordinances. Council Member Brown and then Council Member Matthew. I think one of my questions was answered with respect to wet shelters, although I do think it's worth acknowledging that if we are not going to consider some alternative spaces that are a low barrier in that way, perhaps we wouldn't call them wet but more tolerant that we are not addressing all of the population at the gateway encampment. I mean, that just has to be said. So, you know, I do hope that we can have that conversation and figure out what to do about that because I don't think it's at least not for me. I'm not willing to say that we're going to close or you know, completely shut down the gross camp if we don't have those alternatives. It's really important that we recognize reality. I just want to say that. But so, and I also just want to say that there are so many people have come, I just have to say it now while I have an opportunity. There's so many people who have said to us, you know, kind of repeating this line that, you know, can be spread through our ever increasing and ever aggressive social media outlets that by doing anything tonight, declaring a shelter emergency or, you know, looking at transitional encampments that we are doing something that is entirely out of left field and it's going to invite a whole bunch of people. It's going to enable. It's, you know, the sky is going to fall essentially, but we actually declared on January 23rd, 2018 a shelter emergency. It is currently in place. So, it is not the case that we are doing something out of the blue and taking up this mantle of shelter emergency all of a sudden. It's happening. We're operating under a shelter emergency and we are in fact making a decision tonight about expanding or revising it as an alternative to the homelessness emergency that was proposed two weeks ago that many came out and said they didn't want us to do. So, I just have to be clear. I mean, I think we all need to acknowledge that. I wish more people would who were writing into us with some what I would consider to be a, you know, basis of misinformation there. And so with that, I will stop there and I will ask the question just to clarify. I think I'm getting an answer, but if you could just say it so that we're clear, you are asking us, although it's not in the staff, there is no site in the staff recommendation, you would like us to identify a site tonight. Or at the very latest next week, and I do have slides that we can kind of go through as it relates to the site, but I did want to make one comment back on the issue of wet shelter. So, it is actually quite a nuanced barrier in that, for instance, what I think folks might even consider somewhat high barrier salvation army programs. There are plenty of folks with substance use disorder that are using that program. They hand over their paraphernalia and whatever else they might be bringing and it goes into an amnesty box. So, there is a distinction between using on site and being in a position of having a substance use disorder. And so I think the distinction being, are we allowing substance use on site, on the premises, or are we focused on harm reduction and ensuring that behavioral norms are being adhered to? There are plenty of people in our community that have substance use disorder that can adhere to those rules. All right, so, oh, I'm sorry. Yeah, I did have another question. So, when you say urgently develop and approve a small scale pilot program, your thought is that you would come back at our next meeting with a proposal for both a site and operator for that, is that correct? So, I think for the purposes of next week coming back and having a conversation on site selection, we'll know more about operator capacity and where that fits in hopefully by next week, but I wouldn't necessarily say that for sure. So, now is the time for us to take action. And we have a number of recommendations that were in our report, some of which were agendized as priority to consider and by three council members. So, we have a chance to take action on that this evening, as well as other input from the staff and other ideas that have been brought forward. I'll just say how grateful I was to see your process, analysis and literature and proposal to look at a long-term strategy. And being on a council for now two years, it's music to my ears to be quite honest with you because I feel it's so critical that we continue to think about a project plan that addresses absolutely the immediate needs, some of the interim needs, as well as some of the long-term strategies. And I know they're out there, but to really talk about what that means for Santa Cruz, especially from the evaluation type policy that or the criteria that you proposed. I will just sort of affirm that having heard some of the conditions that are existing at our current encampment, I have concerns about the health and human safety. I know there was a recent fire there. There's been a number of, I believe, some deaths and some ODs and some public health considerations that have been brought to my attention from our police department and our fire department that is very, very concerning. And I also recognize that we have a lot to do to get to the place where I know we want to be as a community in terms of our community process and outreach and ultimately to meet the needs of our various subpopulations. I was reminded recently in education that we have over 3,000 students and children and families living in our county who are experiencing homelessness. So we have a huge issue that has many, many subpopulations from transition age youth, children, adults, struggling in many different ways. And those that are on the brink of homelessness that require some prevention. So I do affirm my commitment to a holistic approach and I think that this staff analysis that is inclusive of that helps get us there. It's starting with some data and feasibility. So in an interest of trying to continue to move forward, I'm hopeful that we can start to move in the direction of making some decisions one way or another. I will acknowledge Vice Mayor Cummings because he mentioned he has a motion he'd like to submit and then we'll go ahead and see if others want to see it. So I'm prepared to make the following motion that is aligned with the staff recommendations that we see before us with a few minor shifts. And so, and I can pass this over to Bonnie. So in case she doesn't want to. So they can help. Can we put it up on the, do you have a viewer screen? Oh, you have multiple. Oh, great. Good. You want to put it up so other, the audience can see it. That was weird. So many of these points fit within the staff recommendations that was just presented above a couple of the points that were in those staff recommendations weren't included. So I'm just going to add those in as well. But update and reaffirm the council adopted City County Joint Action Plan by opening a 60 bed non-profit managed encampment at 1220 River Street on or before April 17th, 2019. Open a small scale, no more than 40 bed, six months pilot transitional encampment, and or safe sleeping and storage site on or before April 17th, 2019. Closing the gateway encampment to coincide with the opening of 1220 River Street program and pilot transitional encampment or safe sleeping and storage site. So just having the closure be contingent upon those two sites being open. Provide a minimum of one week notice to gateway encampment sleepers and day users as to closure date. Move to direct staff to return to council on or before April 9th, 2019 with a siting and operator recommendations for the pilot program. Move to implement the project scope of the transitional encampment charter per the suggested timeline incorporating safe parking to ensure a deliberate and inclusive community process. Move to table discussion on transitional encampment and safe parking ordinance amendments until that subject is contemplated in the project charter scope. Move staff to identify one city parking lot for the utilization of the association of faith community safe parking program to host up to five vehicles per night return to city council on March 26th, 2019 for approval. Include new research and project charter including conducting a shelter feasibility evaluation and unsanctioned encampment management plan and finally adopt the revised shelter crisis declaration. I'll second that. So we have a motion by vice mayor coming second by councilor Matthews. And I think if we could also add expand search for county locations, both public and private. Okay, council member Glover, council member Myers, council member Hal. Thank you. Why I'm ambivalent about the April 17th deadline. I'm looking for used vice mayor Cummings if you could clarify. Is there a reason only a one week notice to the gateway encampment sleepers and all day users of the closure date? That's minimum. Minimum, but I mean, is there a reason why that's so short of a minimum of one week? Why not a minimum of two weeks or a minimum of a month? I know that there was concern actually with the previous date that was set and given the fact that there may be constraints around us being able to open both of those sites by that date. There was some sentiments expressed that we don't want to post a date, for example, tomorrow of April 17th and then get close to that date and have to post another date and to continually be posting different dates. And so I said at a minimum of a week so that they would have at least seven days to be able to decide where they're gonna go and begin to pack up their encampments. I'm completely flexible with adding more time to that if necessary. I was wondering the logic around it, but thank you for that. And then the other thing was a question about the process if we table the discussion on transitional encampment and safe parking program ordinances until it fits within the charter scope, what's the timeline associated with that? I know as you said it was towards the end, but what does that look like and then how will that impact our ability to open up additional sites or to partner with nonprofits that want to move on establishing one of these programs at their facilities? Yeah, so I think I'm gonna have to have a little bit more of a comprehensive conversation with the planning director on this, but we have looked into how to move forward with the pilot and there is a process for which we can add some language to the shelter declaration to provide additional flexibility as to pilot programs and Lee can enhance this as well. So that process would be available for additional sites should we want to move forward ahead of when the ordinances are being considered. Thank you. Pass that out. And if I can add one thing to your point, Council Member Glover about what about other opportunities? Just we have other shelter plans like in the hopper so to speak. So the heap in cash, we should be getting those results like next week. And part of that is getting that next 100 bed or plus facility. So I think that we'll be able to come back to you and actually per the joint action plan, the initial one you adopted on February 12th, I believe we're supposed to come back to you in April to give you an update about whether or not we can meet that July one deadline. Because if you recall the additional shelter capacity that was added that you reference, Susie goes through June 30th. So the VFW does not close on April 15th. The Salvation Army does not close on April 15th as it normally would. It's going to go all the way to June. Now what's the plan as of July one? So we're going to be coming back to you without larger scale and that's more of a county wide look at least a North County look at what's going on. So that's also concurrent track. And just one last question. If you don't mind me. Thank you. I don't know if you have the information fire chief. Hey, Duke. And I'm always afraid I'm going to miss belly, miss, miss, pronounce your name. Hi, Duke. There we go. Can you confirm that the deaths in the camp were caused by overdoses? Or it's my understanding from speaking with camp residents in the council, they had to do with exposure to the weather and age and ailments. So to my knowledge, there's been four deaths since the camp has opened up. One of them was definitively a overdose. Three of them, we won't have the toxicology reports back for two to three months and that's through the county coroner. They did not appear outright to be an overdose, but there could have been concurrent drug use. And some of the subjects did have medical histories outside of a substance use, whether or not they were with exposure or because it was a secondary infection. We won't know that for a couple of months. So I can say that one for sure, there have been overdoses at the camp with the distribution of Narcan to the camp population. We're not getting activated like we would for some other places that did not have access to Narcan. One of the challenges with Narcan is the half-life of Narcan is much shorter than the half-life of an opiate. So you may have a short-term solution to that problem, but depending on what type of opiate you're using, whether it's heroin or fentanyl, that Narcan can wear off and then the person goes into respiratory rest again later on. Thank you. Thank you, Mayor. And then I can't remember where I, I think I can't remember. I think I can't remember where I was, I think I can't remember where I was. I think I can't remember. I think I can't remember. I think I can't remember. I think I can't remember. I think I can't remember about the council member Myers. Just another numbers related, rationale for numbers related question for the maker of the motion with respect to the no more than 40 bed pilot. So the ordinances as drafted say up to 50 beds. And so I'm just wondering why 40 was used rather than 50. And then also with respect to the safe parking program, oh, but making a city parking lot available, the rationale for five, why not, you know, maybe seven or 10, a higher number if they could be accommodated. Just wondering what happened. So this is fitting within the safe parking program that's been established and the funding through with the county. And so that's why this rationale has been used for this small number. And with the no more than 40 beds, I'd be happy to increase that if somebody would want to make a friendly amendment to that. Okay, were you done? I would make the friendly amendment for consistency safe stick with 50 bed for the pilot. And then I just in response to the preference for smaller number of vehicles and fitting with the program, that's for onsite at churches. But if we're talking, I guess I'm wondering because we're talking about offering a city parking lot, which may have greater capacity if the program is willing to operate with a greater number than I'd just like to know that. It's actually less about site and more about operational kind of standards in terms of the amount of staff that they have available to monitor the sites and the kind of the ability to get around to all the different sites and actually interact with the people that are in the RVs and vehicles. So in trying to keep it small scale is really shifting that responsibility to the churches. And I think that in consideration of the city and the county property, it's adding an additional layer of staffing requirement that they would have to do. I just wanted to know that there was a rationale for that. Council member. Thank you. Suzy, I know we had issues with the 1220 when it was up and running. Do you have a sense of how it might run this time? I mean, people said it was too expensive or it was difficult for people to go in and out a lot of times because there'd be a shuttle. There was a lot of criticism from the folks who stayed there. I'm not saying we shouldn't do it. There's certain people who will go there and be I think relatively safe and secure. How's it gonna be? How do you envision it being run any differently than last time? I think it'll be run in a very similar way. And I think that while there are challenges at the beginning of the program, that is true for any program that you initiate in terms of as you're establishing a community and building community, that you'll run into issues with folks who may or may not agree with the behavioral norms that you're expecting. I think towards the middle, towards the end of the program, there was in large part community acceptance and appreciation for the program model and so I think we also have a better understanding with our community of folks experiencing homelessness as to what that program would look like and there will be less kind of misunderstanding as to how people can fit in. So I expect that there will be a high level of utilization and there will be people that don't fit into the program. What I will remark on is that while we're having some challenges filling the beds at the Laurel Street program, the VFW has been consistently full through the winter shelter season, which is pretty different than we've had seen in previous years. So really, previous years you'll see the population or the capacity kind of ebb and flow based on weather. So really cold, really rainy days, you'll see it at full capacity. Otherwise people start flooding out into the community. We have not seen that this year by virtue of changing it to a reservation system, doing the shuttle service. And so if that model is translated to a model where you actually have an individual tent, I think that will be attractive to a whole nother demographic of folks who might not necessarily wanna access the typical shelters. Thank you. The count in the current Ross Gateway camp, how has that been done? I've done it, my own cursory ones and I've come up with more than 100. So I'm just wondering how y'all did that. Yeah, it's a very, very challenging subject trying to figure out how many people are sleeping there versus how many people are utilizing that space during the day as well. And so most recent conversations have really moved towards having the community, the camp council really helping us to determine who there is sleeping and who of those folks that are sleeping are interested in engaging with the city and the council on shelter alternatives. So this week we are gonna be presenting a survey and the camp council has offered to help us engage. We really need that help in kind of developing a more cooperative process. So in addition to that, what Chief Hayduk talked about was actually getting that site survey done so we can ensure that we are engaging with people in each individual tent. There are tents that are being used for storage. I can personally attest to that. So it is very challenging. I think every day is a different situation. I've been out there on warm and clear days where there are hundreds of people there. And I've been there on rainy and cold days where everybody's in their tent and it's impossible to know how many people are there. So it's gonna take some additional time but I do think what we also are hearing from the camp council and the residents is there is a significant difference in the number of people sleeping there versus the people that stay during the day. Okay, and thank you. The moving to the table of the discussion, what's the timeline on that? The timeline that the project charter scope, the project charter people are gonna get back to the council and because I don't support that on the Facebook right here. Yeah, so I don't have the project charter in front of me and Lee can maybe contemplate that a little bit further but as it stands, I think that they're really the intentionality was to do a significant amount of engagement with stakeholders across the community first. Go ahead. The project charter anticipated coming back to the council in the August timeframe. I will say for the amount of outreach that is involved with that as well as the consultation with, for example, the Parks and Recreation Commission and or the Planning Commission and others, that is a very aggressive timeline. Usually something of this sort we would take an extended amount of time. We have some of the drafts that Tony put together and we can use those as a starting point but really we want to engage the community and figure out what is right for us and how can we make this ordinance fit our situation? When is the Laurel Street, excuse me, and the BFW closing? So they have been funded through June 30th. And we're talking August here and so what's gonna be that interim and if we're sort of muzzling another transitional encampment, how are we gonna compensate? So as Tina mentioned, the question of alternative shelter capacity is really wrapped up in this heaping cash RFP process. So we had intended on coming back to council in April as to the feasibility of opening an interim year round shelter for up to 100 beds. That proposal, which is part of the joint action plan is really intended to replace the beds at the BFW and the Laurel Street program. We'll also know more about that process could have attracted many other different operators, nonprofits that are interested in providing shelter in our community. We also propose so we do not know what the outcome of that process is as of yet. Hopefully we'll know pretty soon. Once we have that information, then we can do a gap analysis and much like you're talking about see if there's additional things that we need to explore but really the intentionality is to go from kind of what we have right now on an emergency basis to this interim year round shelter. And then I also wanted to mention in addition to what Lee was talking about for us to collect six months of pilot program data actually gets us out to October. So I do think in addition to concerns about the urgency of how quickly we can turn something around with regard to engagement, we also wanna make sure that we're looking at data from this pilot and really capitalizing on the fact that we are taking the time to engage not only with our community of homeless individuals but with our neighborhoods as well and thinking about outcomes from the client perspective and the neighborhood perspective. So that would actually push us out to October and so it's just something to consider. I just have a brief comment. I feel that with the transitional encampments language it's been often referred to as one of many options I struggle with trying to understand how that is the presumed policy that we're gonna pursue if that would just be one of other options. Do you know what I mean? I think, because what I heard from sort of the other part of the presentation in terms of the process is really understanding that scope, what's available, what's possible, getting community readiness, understanding sort of what would work well and where and how and the data to support and evaluate, et cetera. So it's hard for me to reconcile if we're presuming the solution before we're actually going through the process. And you're talking about the charter there. I'm talking about the transitional encampment which includes the charter as the process. Yeah, so with regard to the pilot transitional encampment or safe sleeping and storage program and the outreach that we are conducting at the encampment, there is a strong affinity to move into a structured encampment program from folks that we're hearing. I think where we have challenges with our continuum of care with regard to sheltering is, for lack of a better word, really the barriers that we people experience with even indoor facilities, dormitory style facilities. And so what we're hearing is kind of these questions around, do we have access to a greater level of privacy? And also the community building, that's part of this kind of self-government model is something that I think would be very attractive to the gateway encampment residents. And then ultimately just diversifying our portfolio is gonna be critically important. And we just don't have that kind of program now. So it would also benefit our greater homeless population as well. I mean, I'll just briefly say, I think come July 1st, we'll have a whole bunch of need in terms of planning and strategy to go into place because a lot of our shelter space will go offline. So I am interested in going through a process to get a better understanding of what's feasible, what our needs are, how to meet those needs. Similar to as was described, that to me makes a really great sense. And I think we could adequately do that within the timeframe. I'm a little bit hesitant in terms of putting kind of the cart before the horse in this regard personally. Okay, Council Member Myers? I'm wondering, Council Member Cummings, if you, the motion includes a lot in it. So there's parts of it that I definitely would like to support, but other parts I'm wondering if we could potentially, would you be amenable to, specifically to the Shelter Crisis Declaration? Can we, can I make a substitute motion that we deal with that as a standalone? Or? I think we could divide the question. I think we should go through each of them. And okay, that's what we want. Okay. Are we at that stage where we're prepared to do that? Okay. Okay. Is that, okay, so we'll go through the motion. Can I ask a question? I didn't catch the second to last bullet on your motion. That's not up here. Can you restate that for staff's benefit and for the public's benefit? That was from the staff recommendation to include new research and projects harder, including conducting a shelter feasibility, evaluation and unsanctioned encampment management plan. Okay, thank you. Add a friendly amendment to the motion to include within that needs assessment the policy alternatives and short intermediate and long-term solutions. And then to add that discussion to the scope of the two by two committee for consideration, which is essentially outlined in much of the presentation. Okay. One more before we go through. Okay, first we'll go Councilor Matthews and then Councilor. And we did add also expand the search for county locations, both public and private. And that was friendly meant by Councilor Myers. Okay, I just want to make sure the intent I'm so I'm concerned. I keep looking at the sentence in Dr. Leff's letter that was sent to us on Friday last week. With regards to the camp closure and the opening tied to the opening of the 1220 River Street. And then there's sort of a category, basically an and which is including the other 40 beds. And I'm worried that we're going to get stuck in a timeline issue again. And the sentence is very clear. I want to emphasize that the encampment currently poses a significant public health risk to the individuals at the encampment. As well as the general community, and it should be permanently closed as soon as possible. So I worry with tying that closure to yet another facility that we still don't have a site for that we don't have an operator for. And we could be slipping yet another month further on before all of that. And what I'm hearing is that the Laurel Street program may have some room. So I'm just worried, I spent all last week talking to a lot of the merchants in that center. And a lot of people are way down on their revenues. One manager told me she's probably going to have to lay people off. So there's real impact that's going on economically there. And I think it's very clear what the county health officer is advising us to do. So I'd like to see if we could maybe work on that and or and figure out a way to keep things moving, okay? Council Member Glover. Thank you. I would say that it's imperative that we keep the language and and emphasize it in fact. So that it is for sure not an and or but an and. So that we can not only make sure that we have the bed spaces for people to move into. But also, so we have spaces for them to move into because if we go and remove them from the camp or close the camp without having adequate amounts of shelter, we talked during our closed session about what that could mean. So we want to make sure that we're up to date with respecting people's human rights. We want to also make sure that we are doing what's right and offering the space that's available for them. I don't think based off of the diligent work that Susie and the rest of the staff has been doing. That the idea that we'll be able to set up a small pilot transitional encampment or safe parking program by the 17th of April, especially with the timeline that was suggested is unfeasible. And it seems more responsible to do it that way. So I would encourage the maker of the motion to keep the current language or be even more specific and remove the or language to make sure that we have those extra 40 beds before we close the camp. People, I'm thinking we should just go, let's go through it and start getting to it. So why don't we just go ahead and piece by piece kind of get a pulse to the council of that. I just asked the friendly amendment from Brown to change to 50 was accepted. Okay, so starting with the first bullet, we have opening a 60 bed non-profit managing encampment at 1220 River Street on or before April 17th, 2019. All those in favor, please say aye. Any opposed? Okay, that passes unanimously. I think, go ahead. I provide one line of clarification for council member Glover. The second bullet point, it's to open the transitional camp with 50 beds and or the slave sleeping in storage site. So the idea being that we would want to have those 50 beds open on or before April 17th and or in addition to those that transitional encampment, the slave sleeping in storage site. Okay, yeah, I mean, I can get behind that and I'm thinking for the clarification. I just want to make sure that the or doesn't get in the way of us being able to offer those now 50 beds. But either way, thank you for clarifying. It's all good. So- Can I ask a question? Susie, is there any reason why we can't have like an option? Because I'm just worried about the tabling the transitional encampment conversation. We have two pilots, is that an option for a second pilot if we get the 40, go with another pilot? I would just highly recommend trying to tackle this first pilot rather than trying to pile on another. We're going to put out more people than we have space for. I think that remains to be seen in terms of who is there and kind of accessing the space for sleeping. We'll know more about that. But generally speaking, based on the intensive outreach that we are doing out there, this 100 beds should be plenty in terms of capacity. In terms of folks that have readiness to move into shelter and wanting to kind of access the services that we have available. So I'll just say that I have concern with that date. I'm absolutely open to considering it for July 1st as we're starting to look at that holistic package. But for me it seems accelerated and there's a lot for us to do in terms of bridging expectations, community outcomes, and for me just personally to understand that. So I just don't feel comfortable with the accelerated timeline personally. So we'll be voting against, but I'm 1 to 7. For one point of clarification, because I'm thinking it's late and I might have misheard this. Bullet number two does not suggest we're opening both types of programs at the same time. It's either a transitional encampment or I'm not sure why there's an end. So I just want to make sure I understand the intentionality around that. Or a safe sleeping and storage site on or before April 17th. With the idea that when we go out to the community and ask about interest in either siding or operating this encampment, we may not yield results that we're looking for in terms of the structure that I think is required for our community. I have great faith that we have people that might be able to do this. The safe sleeping and storage site is I think there's more potential for us to do that very quickly because it really is offering a secure environment. And quite frankly, it's a much lower barrier program. So I think over this next week we really need to understand siding and operational capacity for transitional encampment, but also be poised to offer the safe sleeping site instead of if it comes to that. Okay, and so this is something that's going to come back to us next week, correct? Yes, it's your March 19th meeting, so if you're having a meeting, we figure there's urgency, we'll piggyback on. Okay, so I'll go ahead and support it to come back on the 19th with more information at this time. Can I ask, what is a safe sleeping and storage site? So I have a slide on that. It's where they go and they sleep and then they store the stuff during the day and they just go there to sleep. Yeah, so it's a dust to dawn program, I'm sorry, I'll just describe it. So it's a dust to dawn program which provides an opportunity for safe sleeping. It's typically there's programs in Eugene that actually have kind of a more permanent type of facility. What you see in other locations is you're utilizing space that's otherwise used during the day for other programming. So it actually opens up our options a little bit as well in terms of utilizing parking lots for instance. But it basically is a rest stop right to sleep program. You're providing onsite storage as well. One of the added benefits is that you provide storage potentially for folks that are not using the safe sleeping area, thinking about types of sites. It's basically the same sites as we are looking at for transitional encampments. So for the second bullet, we have opening the small scale no more than 50 beds, six month pilot and transitional encampment. Ani, could you put the motion back up? Why don't you ask if there's anything else people want to pull out and then we can. Okay, that's a good, okay, good call. So is there specific items and then we'll try to vote on all of that we agree on that people want to pull out at this time. I am going to pull at number three for conversation afterward. Closing the gateway encampment, okay. Adopting the revised shelter ordinance, crisis separation, sorry. Okay, so we'll pull the adopting the shelter revised crisis ordinance. I would pull the to table, move to table discussion. Okay. And the remainder is the same as we see it presented essentially with a couple of the additions that were the friendly amendments. Okay, so we'll go ahead and vote in one motion. On returning on March 19th with recommendations or locations for a interim space, either a transitional encampment or safe sleeping or storage site to be potentially implemented by the 17th. So then we'll have that discussion then to provide a minimum of one week notice to gateway encampment sleepers and day users as to close your date, to move to direct the staff to return to council on or before April 9th with a citing and operator recommendations for the pilot program. To implement the project scope of the transitional encampment charter, per suggested timeline, incorporating safe parking to ensure deliberate and inclusive community process. And move to have the staff identify one city parking lot for the utilization of association of faith community's safe parking program to host up to five vehicles per night and return to council on March 26th for approval. And then incorporating the search for county lots, the motion language around establishing a more holistic needs assessment, policy alternatives in short, medium, and long term solutions. And to add that to discussion for the two by two committee with the county. And I think that covers what we're about to talk about. Can I ask for one point of clarification? I thought I heard vice mayor Cummings also, but I don't see it up there. The adoption of the shelter crisis declaration. That was pulled. We're going to have further conversation about that. Okay, so that was pulled. We'll talk about that next. Is that seen clear? Yes, just on the county locations. I specifically said both public and private. Okay, okay, okay. Any further concern polling questions? Okay, all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay, that passes unanimously. Good suggestion. Thank you, councilmember Matthews. Okay, so we'll go ahead and with the first bullet that was pulled was closing the gateway encampment to coincide with the opening of the 1220 River Street program and pilot transitional encampment or safe sleeping and storage site. Councilmember Meyers, I believe you wanted to address this one. Yeah, I would just again request that we tie it to the River Street opening on April 17th. I think it's too much to ask to not. I think I just think it's too much to try to try to get another facility open at the same time. If we can, that's great, but I just can't agree with the word and in there. I mean, both those things try to be achieved and by the by April 17th. I show your concern in that regard. Okay. Any other discussion? Just just going to say I support it. Okay. So all those in favor please say aye. Aye. Aye. Those opposed? No. No. So that passes with councilmember Brown, Matthews, vice mayor Cummings, Crone, Gleaver in support and councilmember Meyers and myself against. Okay. And then the last was. Just two. There are two more. Oh, I'm sorry. Okay, two more. So to table the discussion on transitional encampment and safe parking ordinance amendments until the subject is contemplated in the project charter scope. My sense is we're just not going to find the space and what we're going to have is many people from the gateway camp are going to be sleeping other places unless we have one other low barrier site that identified and we're seeking to get it up and running before the closure of even, you know, the vets, VFW or Laurel Street. I mean, if we can get another one up by then by June, I think it would, I just don't think we have enough space right now. So do you are you proposing that we move forward with adopting the ordinance? Are you proposing that you don't support this and will not vote? No, I don't support this particular ones. I'm just making the case that we shouldn't be tabling it unless we identify another space. As I said before, maybe two options rather than just one option. So the alternative would be to adopt it tonight. Essentially, I would like to see us with the intention of not just one of the safe sleeping or storage sites or transitional encampment. I'd like to see us get to another 50 beds. Council Member Brown, sorry, we'll go over the line. We'll start with you, Council Member Brown. So while I agree with Council Member Crohn's sense of the need and the desire to get some of these pilots or transitional encampments, whatever we want to call it, up and running more quickly to accommodate those who may be displaced, who will be displaced, ultimately. I also know that we've reiterated and reiterated that all of this is contingent on finding sites and operators. And so if adopting an ordinance tonight or moving the ordinance tonight and coming back for second reading, I assume it wouldn't happen as an emergency ordinance, we're, if not doing that, I'm trying to make sure that I say this correctly. If doing that would get us that additional encampment, that additional pilot, then I would be all for doing it. But I don't think just simply saying that we're going to, because we have the ordinance, we're going to make it so, is reflects reality. We just, we don't have operators, we don't have sites. And what I am, if I could clarify what I think I heard y'all say is should an additional pilot be possible, that could happen without an ordinance in place. So we're not precluding an additional pilot, should it be doable? Yeah, no, that's absolutely correct. Even though we're tabling the discussion until August, we could still be here. Yeah, you don't, you don't need the ordinances to explore additional shelter options from. Explore or actually implement? Implement, explore and implement. Okay, so given that information, you're fine with it. Okay, okay, so do you want to vote on that one? Sorry, okay. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay, that passes unanimously. And then I think the last one is the conversation around the Shelter Crisis Declaration or expansion of existing shelter crisis language. So I just, I won't be able to support the motion. I received a lot of, a lot of correspondence on this and some of the, the language has been heavily revised and I understand the intent about it. I've talked with staff about it. But it's, it's a document that's causing a lot of concern in the, in the community, especially around things that people think of as fairly standard process, which is CEQA and the Coastal Act. So I'd like to just postpone, if we can, I'd like to make an alternative motion to bring that back to us on March 9th with some proposed revisions in an attempt to get the community to understand the purpose of the resolution. It's probably the one thing that I got the most comments on. It's a fairly, and as we've said, we have an existing resolution in place. As far as I understand from talking to staff, our existing resolution will allow us to do all of these things. It sounds like, and I think, I think I would, yeah. So I would make an alternative motion that we postpone or refer this to our March 9th meeting and consider further revisions to the document. Okay. Let's move clarification on that date. March 19th, March 19th, it's midnight. So we have an alternative motion to postpone the conversation around it. I'll second that to feel like there's more that I need to understand about that. And again, feel that we'd be happy to revisit it, but it's a little bit fast in regards to bringing the community along, understanding the different components and some of the unintended or just sort of consequences either way with it. That I'd like to know more about. Happy to discuss it more on March 19th if that's the will of the council, if not, I'll say I did second the motion. I feel basically comfortable with this, but I'm also comfortable putting it off for one week because I think it's important that particularly the two of you have the chance to get your questions answered and talk to community. I also have talked with staff. I understand the intention, but I think a week of clarity is probably a good move. So, any further comments? It's covered by Councilman Matthews. Okay, so we'll vote to accept the substitute motion. That would be correct. Okay. And then vote on the substitute motion. And then we'll vote on the substitute motion if it's accepted. No, I'm not. You could just. Okay. All those in favor of the substitute motion to revisit this with an edited version on March 19th, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Nay. Okay, so that passes with Councilmember Brown, Matthews, Vice Mayor Cummings, Councilmember Myers and myself in support, Councilmember Glover and Councilmember Crone voting against. Is that it? No. We got one more. No. Councilmember Matthews. Not on this immediate motion, but we had quite a few comments from the residents in the river neighborhood, upper ocean price, Falker, Tannery, about some requests they made very short term, but they felt very strongly to make the pathway more usable and to protect the impact on the neighbors. So, I wanted to put forth the, I don't know if it's a motion, I asked about the feasibility of carrying out those because they are seriously impacted and maybe it's just putting it off for a month, but I don't know who I'd ask about. Maybe, Tony, is that you? I take their circumstances and their requests seriously. Yeah, I think is the primary concern just number of people on the path and just path being blocked or what is the main concern? Well, one was, as I understand it, pulling back the location of the porta-potties and the sanitation and then screening off the path really the neighbors submitted some diagrams of how it might be achieved. It was the movement of the boundary fence. Yeah, the offering the boundary fence just to protect that area. Yeah, yeah, we can coordinate with the team, public safety, the police department as well and yeah, look for some potential solutions this week. Okay, then I will also move that we direct staff departments as necessary to implement some very short term improvements to protect the, to separate the encampment from the river walk and protect the feeling of safety of public access along there. Thank you. I'll second that. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay, that passes unanimously. I just wanted to add that there'll be some measures that we'll have to take in between now and the April 17th in addition to that just to be able to address the public safety concern just for your information. Like for example, the vector control implementation, the, I think working with the fire department to create space and some of those things. So they'll just have to be some measures that'll have to be taken just to make it address the issues that come up just for your information. These seem just logistical. Yes, yes, but I just want to make you aware of that. Did you have something to add? I just, I don't want to, I just want to, so council your expectations are aligned appropriately. So we're coming back to you Tuesday a week from today. We have to have our agenda packet out on Thursday then which means we have tomorrow to put all of this together. So we will try our best, certainly, but you might expect a little more detail actually coming. The staff presentation has been happening, but we will do our best to just, so you know what we're working with. Okay. I started coming and then I had a comment. But it is possible also to dribble stuff out to us. Well, or, you know, sometimes there's a place in an agenda and then material is. Yes, it certainly can the day of, but what we do whenever you are afforded a piece of information, the community simultaneously is afforded that piece of information. So it just require a lot of updates to the packet in SIR, not insurmountable, but we will, we will try our best to get you as much as we can as soon as possible while maintaining that transparency with the public. Thank you. Yeah, I just had a quick question around whether there would be feasible, whether it would be feasible during this time when a number of these tents are going to be moved and more space is going to be created around them. For that to also be used as an opportunity to get some of the excess of trash that's been mentioned there to get that out as well. Yes. Yes. And that's what I was getting at to just improve overall conditions, sanitation conditions, emergency access. Some of these issues that the fire chief noted again to make it better for the individuals living there and for emergency personnel to get there. And again, to just make it safer sanitation and emergency. Yes. Yes. And I'll just add, I recognize that we have a number of issues impacting our community and this has dominated a lot of our staff time. I'd like to understand what we're not able to get to as a result and or if there is a need for the council to consider any type of consultant support or additional support to help maintain the work and move forward in a thoughtful and productive way that helps meet our needs, but also address the other many issues that the city has and needs that the city has for us to address as well. And so just something to consider to bring back to us ideally at a future time, given that we've now added another really urgent timeline to your workload. All right, so with that. And we just again thank our staff for just an amazing job. Yeah. On that note, we'll go ahead and adjourn. Thank you.